4th Circuit Greenlights Evidence from Contested Search, Undercuts Privacy Rights in Drug and Gun Case

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a unanimous decision on April 28, 2026, reversing a lower court’s suppression of evidence seized from Milton Allen’s bags during his 2023 arrest in Raleigh, North Carolina. Allen faced charges for drug possession and illegal firearms after police caught him riding his bike through an active crime scene and resisting arrest.

Allen’s defense argued that the search of his belongings was unlawful because he was already secured and posed no immediate threat when officers rifled through his bags. However, the appeals court rejected this claim, ruling that under Wake County Detention Center policies, an inventory search of all arrestees’ property during intake is mandatory and would have inevitably uncovered the contraband.

The court’s opinion, authored by a three-judge panel including Judges Albert Diaz, Paul V. Niemeyer, and Toby J. Heytens, emphasized that the policies were explicit and applied uniformly to every arrestee without exception. The panel dismissed the district court’s earlier concerns about the policies lacking sufficient particularity.

During the arrest, Allen resisted violently, biting an officer’s finger and damaging a patrol vehicle, which required four additional officers to subdue him. Police found two loaded pistols, over 11 grams each of cocaine and marijuana, 68 fentanyl doses, a digital scale, multiple cell phones, and nearly $2,000 in cash inside his bags.

This ruling sets a troubling precedent for privacy rights, effectively allowing law enforcement to bypass constitutional safeguards by relying on “inevitable discovery” doctrines tied to routine inventory searches. It underscores a broader pattern of courts prioritizing police authority and procedural formalities over the fundamental protections against unlawful searches and seizures.

Allen is represented by attorneys Colin Alexander Shive and F. Hill Allen IV of Tharrington Smith LLP. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina, with prosecutors Sarah Elizabeth Nokes, Michael F. Easley Jr., and David A. Bragdon, argued for the government.

This case, United States v. Milton Christopher Allen (24-4604), highlights ongoing tensions between law enforcement powers and civil liberties, a battleground that remains critical as police practices around searches and arrests face increasing scrutiny.

At Only Clowns Are Orange, we will continue to track how courts enable or check abuses of power in the criminal justice system, especially when it comes to the erosion of constitutional rights under the guise of law and order. Stay tuned for updates on this and related cases.