Cano

United States v. Cano

Good Law
222 F. Supp. 3d 876·2016 WL 6920449·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163675
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 23, 2016Case No.: 16-cr-01770-BTMCalifornia4,103 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Moskowitz, J.

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS AND MOTION FOR RETURN OF PROPERTY

Presently before the Court are Defendant’s motion to suppress and motion for return of property. The Court held an evidentiary hearing on these matters on October 25, 26 and 31, 2016. For the reasons discussed below, Defendant’s motions are DENIED.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On July 25, 2016 at approximately 6:30 a.m., Defendant, Miguel Angel Cano, applied for entry to the United States at the San Ysidro Port of Entry (“POE”). A Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) officer conducted a primary inspection of Defendant and his pick-up truck. The CBP officer subsequently referred Defendant to secondary inspection.

During secondary inspection, a dog alerted to the spare tire located underneath the bed of the truck. Secondary officers handcuffed Defendant shortly thereafter. Defendant was taken to the security office where he was handcuffed to a bench. CBP officers cut the spare tire open and found approximately 16.52 kilograms of cocaine. Defendant was subsequently placed under arrest.

After the cocaine was found, CBP officers called the Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”) office, which dispatched Special Agents…

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.