From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
United States v. Caraballo
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
831 F.3d 95 (2016)
Melissa Barratt was arrested by the Vermont State Police for selling drugs on May 31, 2011. Barratt told the arresting officers that she was involved in drug activities with Frank Caraballo (defendant). Barratt said that she was terrified Caraballo would hurt or kill her if he knew that she had spoken to the police. Barratt told the police that Caraballo had access to firearms and that Caraballo had been violent in the past. Barratt refused to cooperate with the police out of fear of Caraballo and was eventually released. Over the next two months, local police conducted an investigation into Caraballo’s drug operation. The police completed controlled drug buys from Caraballo through undercover agents and confidential informants. During the investigation, police confirmed that Caraballo was armed and acting as the head of a drug operation. On July 29, Barratt’s body was found in a remote wooded area. She had been shot in the back of the head while kneeling with her hands clasped in front of her, in an apparent execution-style killing. The police believed that Caraballo had killed Barratt and were concerned that a leak might have occurred regarding the investigation and that the undercover agents and confidential informants involved in the investigation were at great and immediate risk. Under these circumstances, law enforcement believed that a legitimate emergency existed and submitted an emergency, warrantless request to Caraballo’s cellular phone company to locate Caraballo’s phone. The cellular company complied with this request. Caraballo’s phone was located in less than two hours, and Caraballo was promptly arrested. Caraballo pleaded guilty to a number of drug-distribution charges. In a separate case, Caraballo was charged with crimes related to drug distribution, firearms offenses, and Barratt’s death. Caraballo moved to suppress the evidence discovered after his arrest, alleging that the warrantless search for his phone violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The district court denied the motion, and Caraballo was convicted. Caraballo appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Calabresi, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 606,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.