United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
HARRIS TOLIVER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
10, 2019, pursuant to the referral of the district judge,
Doc. 21, a hearing was held on Defendant Gary Lynn
Black's Motion to Suppress Evidence, Doc. 19.
Defendant Black, proceeding pro se and with the
assistance of stand-by counsel,  Assistant Federal Public
Defender Stephen Green, announced ready to proceed. The
Government, appearing by and through Assistant United States
Attorney Rebekah Ricketts, likewise announced ready.
Black seeks an order suppressing evidence seized during the
search of 3501 Windy Lane, Alvarado, Texas. Doc. 19,
passim. He avers that the search was pursuant to a
search warrant and resulted in the seizure of “drugs,
[a] shotgun and cash.” Doc. 19 at 1-2.
on the testimony of the sole witness, Task Force Officer Tim
Cortez, and relevant pleadings in this case, the Court makes
the following factual findings:
1. Warrants for the arrest of Defendant Black were
outstanding from January 2018 to May 10, 2018.
2. During that period, law enforcement officials conducted a
covert investigation of Defendant Black with the knowledge
that Defendant Black had outstanding arrest warrants, but did
not arrest Defendant Black.
3. A state search warrant was obtained for the location of
3501 Windy Lane, Alvarado, Texas, at some time prior to May
4. On May 10, 2018, Defendant Black was arrested and
transported to the Windy Lane location, and the search
warrant was executed.
5. Items of evidentiary value were seized during the
execution of the search warrant.
Black argues that the evidence should be suppressed in this
because it was seized in violation of Texas law.
Specifically, he cites Article 38.23 of the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure, which provides:
No evidence obtained by an officer or other person in
violation of any provisions of the Constitution or laws of
the State of Texas, or of the Constitution or laws of the
United States of America, shall be admitted in evidence
against the accused on the trial of any criminal case.
Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.23(a) (West). Doc. 19 at
4. He also contends that the law enforcement officials who
continued to investigate him, rather than arrest him on the
outstanding warrants, violated Article 2.18 of the Texas Code
of Criminal Procedure, which provides, in pertinent part,
that “[w]hen a prisoner is committed to jail by a