UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________

No. 22-1272 ____________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

NYLERE STANFORD, Appellant ____________

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (D.C. No. 1-20-cr-00003-001) District Judge: Honorable Leonard P. Stark ____________

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) January 24, 2023 Before: HARDIMAN, KRAUSE, and MATEY, Circuit Judges

(Filed: July 28, 2023) Eleni Kousoulis Mary K. Healy David Pugh Office of Federal Public Defender 800 King Street Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19801 Counsel for Appellant

David C. Weiss Michael F. McTaggart Kevin P. Pierce Jesse S. Wenger Office of United States Attorney 1313 North Market Street Hercules Building Suite 400 Wilmington, DE 19801 Counsel for Appellee

___________

OPINION OF THE COURT ____________ HARDIMAN, Circuit Judge.

This appeal requires us to decide whether Delaware first- and second-degree robbery are crimes of violence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. We hold they are. We also hold the District Court did not err when it applied the

2 good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to deny a motion to suppress evidence.

I

A

On September 18, 2019, Appellant Nylere Stanford, his girlfriend, and two or three others allegedly robbed a convenience store in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Almost three weeks later, the North Carolina authorities obtained a warrant for Stanford’s arrest. The warrant alleged that Stanford helped steal $3,000 from the convenience store using a pistol and rifle. The day the warrant was issued, North Carolina police contacted Detective Justin Cannon of the Wilmington Police Department to seek help apprehending Stanford, whom they believed had fled to Delaware.

About two weeks later, Detective Cannon applied for a search warrant authorizing the use of a cell-site simulator to locate Stanford’s cell phone. Cannon alleged that Stanford was “originally from the Wilmington, Delaware area” and that he had “numerous family members” and “associates” who could “assist him [] while on the run from North Carolina.” App. 58. He also requested authorization to use electronic investigation techniques for three days from the date of the warrant application because, once Stanford’s cell phone was located, law enforcement would need to “conduct surveillance to establish probable cause for a residence search warrant.” Id. A judge issued the warrant the same day.

Warrant in hand, law enforcement quickly discovered that Stanford was staying at 615 S. Buttonwood Street in Wilmington (the Residence). While conducting surveillance,

3 police approached a woman who exited the Residence and asked her if Stanford was there. She said Stanford and Naki Gibson—who turned out to be Stanford’s brother and was wanted on other charges—were inside.

Based on that tip, officers knocked, announced, and entered the unlocked door to the Residence. Stanford concedes that he was found “lying on a couch with a sheet and a pillow,” having “slept there the night before” as an “overnight guest.” App. 39, 105. Stanford and his brother were taken into custody without incident.

Detective Cannon later applied for a warrant to search the Residence for evidence of the North Carolina robbery— any firearms or clothing matching the convenience store’s security camera footage, or documents suggesting a secondary residence. Cannon’s affidavit (the Affidavit) alleged that Stanford was wanted in connection with the robbe