Hattrick
United States v. Hattrick
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Defendant Bruce Joseph Hattrick (“Hattrick”) was convicted of manufacture of 1000 or more marijuana plants in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(vii). Hattrick appeals on three grounds, contending that the district court erred in: (1) denying his first motion to suppress evidence because it found that his trailer was not a dwelling for Fourth Amendment purposes; (2) denying his second motion to suppress evidence because it concluded that the search warrant was not unconstitutionally defective; and (3) finding him ineligible for “safety valve relief’ at sentencing based on his statements to the government. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recite them in detail. We affirm.
We review de novo the question of whether an area of land is protected under the Fourth Amendment as the curtilage of a dwelling. United States v. Barajas-Avalos, 377 F.3d 1040, 1054 (9th Cir.2004), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 1188 , 125 S.Ct. 1396 , 161 L.Ed.2d 192 (2005). We agree with the district court that Hattrick’s trailer was not a dwelling because Hattrick’s residence was at a separate location and, by time of the search, he only used his trailer…