USA v. Collins

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 	§
§
v. 	§ 	Criminal Action No. H-25-cr-4
§
DARRELL WAYNE COLLINS. 	§
§
AMENDED ORDER1
Pending before the 	Court 	is Defendant's 	Opposed Motion to 	Suppress
Evidence Obtained During an Illegal Search (Document No. 43). On October 31,
2025, the Court conducted a hearing on the motion to suppress (the "Suppression
Hearing"). Having considered the pending motion, 	submissions, evidence and
representations presented during the Suppression Hearing, and the applicable law,
the Court determines that the motion should be granted.
r The Court notes the Government's email correspondence received on November
13, 2025, at 4:21PM, objecting to the eighth line of page 5 of the Court's Prior Order
(Document No. 60). The Government notes their disagreement with the Court's
phrasing in describing the affidavit prepared by the Houston Police Department that
was submitted to obtain a search warrant for the Defendant's apartment. In the
interest of accuracy, the Court hereby issues the following amended order changing
one word within the disputed sentence.
1
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
November 13, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 7

I. BACKGROUND
On June 8, 2022, the Houston Police Department ("HPD") received a 911 call
reporting a disturbance at 6363 W Airport Blvd Apt. #1003, Houston, TX 77035
("the Apartment"). In response, HPD Officers Jason Mohammadi and Matthew
Lopez were dispatched to the Apartment. Upon arriving at the Apartment and
approaching the front door, the HPD Officers observed no physical or audible signs
of a disturbance. Once the officers reached the front door of the Apartment, Officer
Mohammadi proceeded to 	knock 	on the 	closed apartment 	door three times,
eventually pushing the door open with his flashlight. The police then executed a
warrantless search of the Apartment, which resulted in the discovery of several
firearms and jars of illicit substances believed to be marijuana.
Based on the foregoing, on January 7, 2025, a federal grand jury in Houston,
Texas returned an indictment against Defendant Darrell Wayne Collins ("Collins").
On June 17, 2025, the government filed its superseding indictment charging Collins
with two felony counts of felon in possession of a firearm, one felony count of
possession of a machinegun in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and one
felony count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.
On October 21, 2025, Collins filed the pending motion to suppress.
II. LAW AND ANALYSIS
2
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 7

Collins moves to suppress evidence seized during, and deriving from, the
warrantless search of the Apartment, contending the law enforcement officers who
conducted the search lacked justification to support the warrantless search. The
Government contends that the warrantless search of the Apartment was justified
because exigent circumstances permitted officers to enter the Apartment to render
emergency aid and conduct a safety sweep.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals
"against unreasonable searches and seizures." U.S. Const. amend. IV. "[S]earches
and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable."
Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 586 (1980). "Before agents of the government
may invade the sanctity of the home, the burden is on the government to demonstrate
exigent circumstances that overcome the presumption of unreasonableness that
attaches to all warrantless home entries." Welsh v. 	Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 750
(1984). "Although presumptively unreasonable, a warrantless entry will survive
constitutional scrutiny if, inter alia, exigent circumstances exist to justify the
intrusion." United States v. Rico, 51 F.3d 495, 500-01 (5th Cir. 1995). "The burden
is on the government to prove the existence of the exigency." Id. at 501.
One such exigency is known as the "emergency aid exception" allowing
officers to "enter a home without a warrant to render emergency assistance to an
injured occupant or to protect an occupant from imminent injury." Brigham City,
3
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 3 of 7

Utah v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006). The emergency aid exception to the Fourth
Amendment requires the officer to have an "objectively reasonable basis for
believing that a person within the house is in need of immediate aid." Mincey v.
Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 392 (1978).
Here, the Government contends that the HPD Officers were justified in
entering the Apartment pursuant to the emergency aid exception to the Fourth
Amendment of the Constitution. The Government further contends that a 911 call
noting a potential domestic disturbance, combined with the observation of broken
glass upon opening the Apartment's front door, justified the entry and search of the
Apartment "to make sure that victims are safe and suspects are apprehended." 2 In
response, Collins contends that there was not an objectively reasonable basis for
believing that a person was in immediate need of aid such to justify a warrantless
search of the Apartment.
At the Suppression Hearing, HPD Officer Mohammadi-the lead officer who
conducted the warrantless search of the Apartment-testified that he and •HPD
Officer Lopez observed no indicators of an emergency, either physical or audible,
when approaching and initially knocking on the front door of the Apartment.
Defendant Collins contends that the only indicator of any emergency occurred after
2 Government's Supplemental Brief in Opposition to the Defendant's Motion to
Suppress, Document No. 43 at 2.
4
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 4 of 7

Officer Mohammadi knocked on the Apartment's front door a second time, at which
point the door opened approximately six inches, allowing Officer Mohammadi to
allegedly observe broken glass. Collins further contends that the mere observation
of broken glass by HPD officers does not constitute corroboration of an emergency,
and refers the Court to well-established Fifth Circuit authority that minimal signs of
physical distress alone, absent evidence "of medical distress requiring immediate
aid, such as loss of blood, signs of physical illness, or evidence that the individual
had been carried or dragged," does not constitute exigent circumstances justifying
immediate entry into a home. United States v. Troop, 514 F.3d 405, 410 (5th Cir.
2008).
A review of the record in this case and the arguments raised by the parties at
the 	Suppression •Hearing 	reveals 	that 	the 	only 	evidence 	in 	support 	of the
Government's proffered theory that the warrantless search of the Apartment was
justified by the emergency aid exception is: ( 1) a 911 call made by a neighbor not at
or near the Apartment at the time of the incident; (2) and Officer Mohammadi's
observation of glass obtained after pushing open the closed door of the Apartment.
The Court also notes Officer Mohammadi's testimony at the Suppression
Hearing, which showcased a multitude of errors in the approach taken by HPD in
executing a warrantless search of the Apartment. First, Officer Mohammadi testified
that he did not attempt to corroborate or investigate the 911 call made by a neighbor
5
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 5 of 7

who received information of an alleged disturbance at the Apartment secondhand.
Second, Officer Mohammadi testified that he moved and relocated multiple mason
jars containing a substance believed to be marijuana without a warrant, stating for
the Court that he knew that he was not permitted to do so. Third, Officer Mohammadi
testified that he told a passerby and his fellow Officer Lopez that the door to the
Apartment was "wide open," and later acknowledged after reviewing his body
camera footage that these statements were false. 	Fourth, Officer Mohammadi
conceded in his testimony that the affidavit submitted to obtain a search warrant for
the Apartment contained multiple false statements.
Having considered the foregoing, pending motion, testimony and evidence
presented at the Suppression Hearing, and strong guidance from the Fifth Circuit
regarding the Government's burden of proof to justify a warrantless entry and search
of a person's home, the Court finds that HPD Officers Mohammadi and Lopez were
not justified in conducting a warrantless search of Collins' home. Accordingly, the
Court determines that the pending motion to suppress should be granted.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Defendant's Opposed Motion to Suppress Evidence Obtained •
During an Illegal Search (Document No. 43) is GRANTED. The Court further
6
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 6 of 7

ORDERS that all evidence derived from the Houston Police Department's
warrantless entry on June 8, 2022, into Defendant Darrell Wayne Collins' dwelling
located at 6363 W Airport Blvd Apt. #1003, Houston, TX 77035 is SUPPRESSED.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this~ day of November, 2025.
7
DAVID HITTNER
United States District Judge
Case 4:25-cr-00004 Document 62 Filed on 11/13/25 in TXSD Page 7 of 7