United States v. Indalecio Ibarra

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 10973·345 F.3d 711·2003 WL 22220369·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8691·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 19804
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 26, 200302-30389California2,507 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hall, J.

Indalecio Ibarra appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). Ibarra argues that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the seizure and search of his automobile conducted by Oregon state police. Ibarra argues that both the seizure and subsequent search of his vehicle were unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment, we AFFIRM.

Facts

In the early morning hours of February 20, 2001, Ibarra was pulled over for speeding by Oregon state Trooper Pam Gaither. At the spot where Ibarra was pulled over, another police officer, Detective David Beck, happened to be present with his drug-detecting dog, Beepers. As Trooper Gaither began to write Ibarra a citation, Detective Beck walked Beepers around the exterior of Ibarra’s Isuzu Trooper. Beepers indicated that the odor of narcotics was emanating from the Isuzu. Trooper Gaither and Detective Beck attempted to get Ibarra to consent to a search but he did not appear to understand English. Gaither then gave…

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.