Solario
United States v. Solario
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Solario appeals his conviction and 292-month sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute. We affirm.
Fourth Amendment Claims
Solario contends 1) that the police did not have probable cause to make a warrantless arrest and 2) that the search of Solario’s car violated the Fourth Amendment. Whether the police had probable cause to arrest Solario is a mixed question of law and fact, which we review de novo. United States v. Valencia-Amezcua, 278 F.3d 901, 906 (9th Cir.2002).
The police in this case had probable cause to arrest Solario. They had extensive information from two informants tying Solario to a methamphetamine lab and substantial drug-trafficking scheme, including the use of Solario’s vehicles, and they corroborated this information. Consequently, when the police stopped Solario they had probable cause to arrest him.
Moreover, there was no Fourth Amendment violation in the police search of Solario’s car. “Officers who have probable cause to believe that an automobile contains evidence of a crime may search the vehicle, including the trunk and all containers in which there is probable cause to believe that…