Unpublished Disposition, 880 F.2d 1324 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Appellant Gerald Keith Redmond challenges his conviction, based upon a conditional plea of guilty, for unarmed bank robbery, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) (Supp. IV 1986). Specifically, Redmond contends that a warrantless search of his apartment was improper and that evidence gleaned from that search should therefore have been suppressed by the district court. We disagree and affirm.

On January 20, 1988, Darrell and Melody Corbin, managers of the Casa Blanca Apartments in Lomita, California, contacted the Lomita substation of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and reported that they had found money with red dye on it in an abandoned apartment. Sheriff's Deputy E.M. Nicoletti responded to the scene and elicited the following information from the Corbins:

(1) appellant Gerald K. Redmond was the tenant of the apartment in question;

(2) Redmond was late paying his rent in November and December, 1987, and had never paid rent for January of 1988 although rent was due on the first of the month;

(3) on January 10, the Corbins served Redmond with a notice to pay rent or quit;

(4) when Redmond contacted the Corbins regarding the delinquent rent, he indicated that he would be moving out within the week;

(5) the Corbins never saw Redmond again, although they repeatedly knocked on his door;

(6) the Corbins never saw Redmond's automobile in the parking lot after their final talk with him;

(7) the Corbins had prior experience with abandoned apartments;

(8) on January 19, having determined that the premises had been abandoned, the Corbins entered the apartment to inspect it for possible water damage because other tenants had complained about leaks during recent rains;

(9) upon entering the apartment, the Corbins discovered that it was filthy--littered with trash and empty beer bottles--and did not appear to have been recently occupied; and

(10) the Corbins also observed a large amount of United States currency scattered around the apartment, much of it covered with red dye.

Based upon these facts, Deputy Nicoletti concluded that the Corbins had authority to consent to a search of the apartment because it had been abandoned.

Deputy Nicoletti's search of the premises uncovered currency and other evidence linking Redmond to a bank robbery that had taken place on November 27, 1987 at the California First Bank in Lomita. When Redmond was subsequently confronted by the police and told of their suspicions, he gave a full confession to the crime. After the district court refused to suppress the evidence obtained in the warrantless search of his apartment, Redmond entered a conditional plea of guilty and timely appealed.

This case is controlled by United States v. Sledge, 650 F.2d 1075 (9th Cir. 1981). Sledge involved a similar search of an apartment authorized by its manager. In that case, Sledge and Williams, the tenants, gave the manager 30-days notice and indicated that they intended to vacate their apartment by March 31. Although the rent was paid through March 31, the manager discussed with Sledge and Williams the possibility of their leaving early so that the apartment could be ready for new tenants by April 1. On March 15, the manager tried to locate the tenants to determine when they would leave. He could not find them, nor did a message taped to their door and repeated telephone calls establish contact. When the manager went by the apartment on March 29, he noted that the front door was open and the entry light was on. The tenants had apparently begun moving their possessions out of the apartment about two weeks previously. From his vantage point outside the apartment, the manager could see that the living room and kitchen were now empty. When the situation remained unchanged a few hours later, he closed the door and left another note. The next afternoon, the note was still on the door and a neighbor indicated that she had not seen the tenants. The manager then entered the apartment. Id. at 1075-76, 1079 n. 7.

Although the apartment had been relatively neat on the manager's previous visits, it was now empty of all furniture save that which belonged to the landlord. No food remained in the apartment and little clothing was present. Further, trash--including empty bottles, plastic trash pails, hangers, trash bags filled with glass jars, and a box of chemicals--was strewn about the premises. There was also a shotgun in the bedroom. Id. at 1076.

The manager called the Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") and related the above facts to an agent who had previously contacted him and expressed an interest in Sledge and Williams. This agent was also aware of a conversation he had with Sledge on February 29. In that conversation, the agent informed Sledge that he knew where Sledge was living. Sledge gave notice to his landlord almost immediately thereafter. Id. at 1076, 1079 n. 7. In light of all these circumstances, the DEA agent concluded that he could enter and search the apartment without a warrant based upon the manager's authorization. Evidence gleaned from that search was later introduced at a trial of Sledge and Williams on drug charges. Id. at 1076. This circuit upheld the warrantless search, stating:

The officer in the case before us acted with care to determine the landlord's authority to admit him. He reviewed the landlord's recitation of the facts which indicated abandonment. The facts were consistent with his own observations and knowledge of the case. He was entitled to assume that the appellants' expectation of privacy had not survived the landlord's apparent right to enter the property and to consent to its search by law enforcement officers.

Id. at 1079 (footnote omitted).

Thus, the warrantless search in the instant case was permissible if Deputy Nicoletti acted reasonably in concluding that the Corbins had authority to admit him. We conclude that he did.¹  Deputy Nicoletti carefully reviewed all the facts described to him by the Corbins. From the managers he learned that Redmond was almost three weeks delinquent in his rent and had admitted to the Corbins that he would have to move out because he could not raise the necessary rent money. The Corbins never saw Redmond again, despite repeated attempts to contact him. Finally, the Corbins, who had experience with abandoned apartments, felt the condition of the premises was consistent with abandonment.²  The district court did not err in concluding that the evidence obtained by searching Redmond's apartment need not be suppressed.

AFFIRMED.