United States v. Vincent Jones

MEMORANDUM

Vincent Anthony Jones (Jones) appeals the district court’s denial of his motions to suppress evidence found in his car after he was arrested for bank robbery. Jones also appeals the district court’s denial of his request for a Franks hearing.

1. The district court did not err when it denied Jones’s motions to suppress evidence seized from the first search of his car based on the determination that the search was justified by probable cause. See United States v. Rodgers, 656 F.3d 1023, 1028 (9th Cir.2011) (“Probable cause exists when, under the totality of the circumstances, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place.”) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).

2. Likewise, the district court did not err in concluding that the second search was justified for the same reason. See United States v. Noster, 590 F.3d 624, 634 (9th Cir.2009), as amended (“[T]he justification to conduct a warrantless search does not vanish once the car has been immobilized, and there is no requirement that the warrantless search of a vehicle occur contemporaneously with its lawful seizure ....”) (citations, alteration, and…