Villanueva-Madriz

United States v. Villanueva-Madriz

Good Law
234 F. App'x 454
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 2007No. 06-30423California592 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Sergio Villanueva-Madriz entered a conditional guilty plea and was convicted of violating 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (deported alien found in the United States) and 21 U.S.C. § 841 (possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute). On appeal, Villanueva-Madriz contends that the district court improperly denied his motion to suppress. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Villanueva-Madriz contends that the methamphetamine discovered in the battery compartment of the van he was driving should have been suppressed for two reasons. First, Villanueva-Madriz contends that the stop was excessive in scope and duration. Second, Villanueva-Madriz contends that his consent to search was not knowing and voluntary. We find both of Villanueva-Madriz’s arguments unpersuasive.

1. Scope and duration of the stop

The scope of an investigative detention “must be carefully tailored to its underlying justification.” Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500 , 103 S.Ct. 1319 , 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983). If the officer asks questions or investigates issues that go beyond the scope of the original justification for the stop, and this investigation prolongs the…

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.