Roberts

United States v. Roberts

Good Law
37 F. App'x 855
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 5, 2002No. 00-10462; D.C. No. CR-98-00412-SOMCalifornia1,254 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant Vernon Lee Roberts appeals his conviction and sentence for possession with intent to distribute in excess of 100 grams of crystal methamphetamine. Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

1. Officer Dwayne Stickles did not violate Roberts’ Fourth Amendment rights when he first approached Roberts and began to question him. A law enforcement official “may stop and question any individual for any reason as long as the person to whom questions are put remains free to disregard the questions and walk away; such an encounter is not a seizure.” United States v. Arias-Villanueva, 998 F.2d 1491, 1501 (9th Cir.1993); see also United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 555 , 100 S.Ct. 1870 , 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980); Morgan v. Woessner, 997 F.2d 1244, 1252 (9th Cir.1993).

2. Officer Stickles also did not violate Roberts’ Fourth Amendment rights when he detained Roberts’ luggage for the purpose of conducting a dog-sniff search. It does not matter whether we accept Roberts’ argument that he did not consent to the detention (as opposed to an on-the-spot search) of his luggage, as Officer SticWes had a…

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.