Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 03-11-2025

Case Style:

United States of America v. Joseph Gaye

Case Number: :21-CR-00015

Judge: WJM

Court: United States District Court for the District of Coloraod (Denver County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States District Attorney's Office in Denver

Defendant's Attorney:



Click Here For The Best Denver Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory



Description: Denver, Colorado criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Joseph Gaye was staying late at his office when he called 911, reporting that a man wearing a mask ran in, shot him, and ran out. Officers and first responders arrived on scene soon after and found Mr. Gaye bleeding on the floor. As Mr. Gaye as rushed to the hospital, officers noticed a bullet casing on his desk, but no sign of any forced entry, struggle, or another person. They began to suspect that Mr. Gaye had shot himself and falsely reported that he was shot by an ntruder.

The officers secured a search warrant specifying their suspicions that Mr. Gaye falsely reported a crime. Officers searched the office, and found a handgun in a locked drawer, with one bullet missing from the magazine. Meanwhile, surgeons removed the bullet from Mr. Gaye’s leg. The bullet was later matched to the
handgun found in Mr. Gaye’s office.

Mr. Gaye, a felon, was indicted and convicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm. He seeks on appeal to suppress evidence produced by the search warrant, and to suppress the bullet removed from his leg. But because the warrant was specific and executed in good faith, and Mr. Gaye consented to the bullet’s removal, thereby voluntarily relinquishing any privacy interest in it, we hold there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment.


* * *

Mr. Gaye moved to exclude the evidence found in his office and the bullet removed from his leg, arguing they were obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. He contends his office was searched without a sufficiently specific warrant, and that the bullet was seized without a warrant or reasonable suspicion.

Outcome: Affirmed on appeal.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: