Albert Alexander filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against eight Lafayette Police Department officers after they seized dozens of electronics and appliances from his home during a January 2011 search for firearms. The officers had obtained a warrant to search Alexander's residence at 212 I-B Street for firearms after his granddaughter and her girlfriend reported that the convicted felon possessed a shotgun. During the search, officers found only pellet rifles but seized three flatscreen televisions, three DVD players, four stereo systems, a laptop computer, household appliances, and other items they suspected were stolen—none of which were listed in the warrant.
Writing for a unanimous panel, Circuit Judge Edith Brown Clement, joined by Judges Douglas and Ramirez, held that the seizures were constitutional under the plain view doctrine. "Looking to the totality of the circumstances, it is undisputed that, before the search, Officer Strong received tips from Sharlette and Morrison that Alexander kept stolen items at his residence," Clement wrote. The court found that when officers entered the home and observed electronics "either stored in their original, unopened packaging, wrapped in plastic, covered with pillowcases, or placed on top of blankets," they had probable cause to believe the items were stolen.
The court emphasized that the officers' experience informed their assessment, noting that "Officer Strong testified that the number of items in the house and the fact that many of the items were in their original packaging reminded her of cases she had worked in which people stored and resold stolen goods." The panel concluded that "a reasonable officer could have believed that there was a 'practical, nontechnical' probability" that the items were stolen property.
The case began when Alexander's granddaughter Sharlette and her girlfriend Morrison contacted police about a December 2010 domestic disturbance. During follow-up interviews, both women told Officer Kristina Strong that Alexander—previously convicted of a felony—owned firearms and "kept stolen items in his house," including electronics and furniture. They reported that Alexander "had bragged about stealing things without getting caught." U.S. District Judge James Brady of the Western District of Louisiana had granted summary judgment to the officers, finding they were entitled to qualified immunity.
Alexander argued that the officers violated Arizona v. Hicks by conducting additional investigation to establish probable cause, specifically pointing to Officer Strong's phone call to Morrison during the search to confirm the items were stolen. But the Fifth Circuit rejected this argument, explaining that "the officers already had probable cause to believe the items were stolen before Officer Strong called Morrison" based on the pre-search tips and observations at the scene.
The panel distinguished the case from Creamer v. Porter, where the Fifth Circuit found officers conducted an impermissible "general exploratory search." Unlike in Creamer, where officers seized items "at random" with no indicia of criminality, here "the officers had received tips that Alexander possessed stolen electronics and appliances, and when they entered the residence, they saw items that corroborated those tips," Clement wrote. The court noted that the warrant authorized a broad search for "any and all firearms" and related items, justifying continued searching after finding the pellet rifles.
Alexander was eventually charged with six counts of possession of stolen property and detained for over two years pending trial, but a jury acquitted him on the two remaining counts in January 2014. The electronics seized during the first search remained in police evidence until the Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government sold them at auction in 2016, two years after Alexander's acquittal. The ruling affirms that law enforcement officers who seize suspected stolen property in plain view during lawful searches are protected by qualified immunity when they have reasonable grounds for their suspicions.