Vichas

United States v. Vichas

Good Law
15 F. App'x 410
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 9, 2001No. 00-30242; D.C. No. CR 00-003-WFNCalifornia865 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant Deno Jaggir Vichas appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress. After the district court denied the motion, Vichas entered a conditional plea of guilty to a charge of possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review motions to suppress evidence de novo. United States v. Wright, 215 F.3d 1020, 1025 (9th Cir.2000). The district court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Mattarolo, 209 F.3d 1153, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2000).

Vichas first contends that the initial stop of his truck was a warrantless seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement agents may make brief investigatory stops of moving vehicles when they have founded suspicion that the occupants have been or are involved in criminal activity. Guam v. Ichiyasu, 838 F.2d 353, 355 (9th Cir.1988); see also Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). In evaluating whether reasonable suspicion exists, we consider the totality of the circumstances. United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 417 , 101 S.Ct. 690 , 66 L.Ed.2d 621…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.