Watts

United States v. Watts

Good Law
175 F. App'x 112
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 10, 2006No. 05-30161California447 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Marvin Watts entered a conditional guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm, after the district court denied his motion to suppress the gun found pursuant to a search incident to arrest. Watts claims that the investigative detention that led to the arrest was not based on reasonable suspicion, violating his Fourth Amendment rights under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Therefore, Watts insists, the evidence should have been suppressed. We review the denial of a motion to suppress evidence de novo, United States v. Michael R., 90 F.3d 340, 345 (9th Cir.1996), and underlying findings of fact for clear error. United States v. Kim, 25 F.3d 1426, 1430 (9th Cir.1994). We affirm.

For an investigative detention, or “Terry stop” to be justified, the police officer must be able to point to specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant that intrusion. 392 U.S. at 21 , 88 S. Ct. 1868 . The “reasonable suspicion” standard is a lower standard than the probable cause necessary to justify an arrest, but it requires more than a mere “hunch.” United States v.…

Concurring Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

concurring.

I concur in the result.

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.