United States v. Joseph T. Brady

Following his conditional guilty plea to manufacturing marijuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1), Brady appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The district court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 8231 . In his plea, Brady expressly reserved his right to appeal. We thus have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

The facts of this case are set forth in the district court’s opinion. See United States v. Brady, 734 F.Supp. 923, 925-26 (E.D.Wash.1990) (Brady).

Brady argues that the district court erred in holding that his Fourth Amendment rights were not implicated by a warrantless search of an outbuilding on Brady’s property. As the district court recognized, and as we recently held in United States v. Traynor, 990 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir.1993) (Traynor), resolution of this question turns solely on whether the outbuilding in question is within the protected curtilage of Brady’s home. See id. at 1156 . The district court held that this outbuilding is not within the curtilage, Brady, 734 F.Supp. at 929 , and therefore no Fourth Amendment violation occurred.

A.

As mandated by our…