USA V. MOTLEY, No. 21-10296 (9th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
In this case, the defendant, Myron Motley, was convicted and sentenced for his involvement in a conspiracy to distribute controlled substances—oxycodone and hydrocodone. Motley appealed his conviction, arguing that the evidence obtained from two GPS tracking warrants and a wiretap warrant was obtained illegally.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court's decision to deny Motley's motion to suppress the evidence obtained from the GPS tracking warrants. The court held that Motley had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his opioid prescription records maintained in Nevada's Prescription Monitoring Program database due to the government's long-standing and pervasive regulation of opioids. Therefore, the Fourth Amendment challenge to the GPS tracking warrants failed.
Additionally, the court affirmed the lower court's determination that the wiretap warrant was supported by probable cause and was necessary. The court found that the affidavit supporting the wiretap warrant application contained sufficient evidence establishing probable cause that Motley was engaged in a conspiracy to illegally distribute prescription opioids. The affidavit also contained enough information for the court to reasonably conclude that a wiretap was necessary to identify the full scope of the conspiracy.
The court dismissed Motley's counterarguments, stating that the government's need for a wiretap was not negated simply because it managed to obtain some evidence of a conspiracy without a wiretap. The court explained that the government has a powerful interest in identifying all conspirators and the full scope of the conspiracy. For these reasons, the court affirmed the lower court's decisions.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed (1) the district court’s order denying Myron Motley’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from two GPS tracking warrants, and (2) the district court’s determination that a wiretap warrant was supported by probable cause and was necessary, in a case in which Motley was convicted and sentenced arising from his involvement in a conspiracy to distribute controlled substances— oxycodone and hydrocodone.
Given the government’s long-standing and pervasive regulation of opioids, the panel held that Motley had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his opioid records maintained in Nevada’s Prescription Monitoring Program database. Thus, Motley’s Fourth Amendment challenge to the resulting tracking warrants fails. The panel therefore affirmed the order denying the suppression motion.
Concerning the wiretap determination, the panel wrote that the affidavit supporting the warrant application contained more than sufficient evidence establishing probable cause that Motley was engaged in a conspiracy to illegally distribute prescription opioids, and also contained sufficient information for the court to reasonably conclude that a wiretap was necessary to identify the full scope of the conspiracy. The panel addressed Motley’s remaining arguments in a concurrently filed memorandum disposition.
Judge Graber concurred in the part of the opinion that rejects Motley’s challenges to the wiretap warrant, and concurred in the judgment. She did not join the part of the opinion that affirms the denial of the motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the tracking warrants. She would uphold the denial of the motion to suppress on alternative grounds: the good-faith exception and harmlessness. She would not reach the substantial legal question of whether Motley had an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the identity and dosage of his prescription medications.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.