Sandoval
United States v. Sandoval
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Jose Juan Sandoval appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence of a firearm discovered during a Terry stop. After the district court denied his motion to suppress, Sandoval entered a conditional guilty plea to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . “On appeal of the denial of a motion to suppress evidence, we review conclusions of law de novo and factual findings for clear error.” United States v. Chavez-Miranda, 306 F.3d 973, 977 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.
“[A]n officer may, consistent with the Fourth Amendment, conduct a brief, investigatory stop when the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.” Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 123 , 120 S.Ct. 673 , 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000) (citing Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 30 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)). As Sandoval concedes, Officer Greg Stys had reasonable suspicion to stop Sandoval in order to determine whether he was in violation of a local curfew ordinance.
Sandoval nevertheless argues that Officer Stys lacked reasonable suspicion to continue…