Case Explained: United States of America v. Andre McCoy

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-12 The eighth-circuit affirmed the denial of Andre McCoy’s motion to suppress evidence but remanded the case for a limited purpose regarding his sentencing judgment. The court held that law enforcement possessed probable cause to arrest McCoy without a warrant based on the totality of circumstances surrounding a homicide investigation, citing *Brown v. City of St. Louis* and *United States v. Perry*. Additionally, the court found that McCoy provided knowing and voluntary consent to search his firearm both at the scene and at the substation, noting he did not limit the scope of that consent, which renders the warrantless search valid under *United States v. Marr*. Consequently, the suppression motion was affirmed under the standard of review established in *United States v. Guzman*. However, the court identified a conflict between the oral pronouncement of special condition S2 at sentencing and the written judgment regarding drug testing and treatment. The oral order required McCoy to participate “to the extent [he] need[s]” treatment and testing, whereas the written judgment mandated he “must participate” in both without such qualification. Applying the rule from *United States v. Mays* that the oral pronouncement controls a conflicting written judgment, the court remanded with instructions for the district court to amend the written judgment to conform to the oral order. The judgment is affirmed in all other respects and remanded solely to correct this discrepancy. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.