United States v. Iruretagoyena
This text of 127 F. App'x 383 (United States v. Iruretagoyena) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
The defendant appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress. He challenges the admissibility of contraband seized from his vehicle at the border and statements made after he was arrested and given Miranda warnings.
There was no violation of Miranda, and the statements were voluntarily made. Despite the government’s appropriate concessions before the district court coneerning the lawfulness of the detention, the Supreme Court has now clarified the law. See United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149, 155, 124 S.Ct. 1582, 158 L.Ed.2d 311 (2004) (no Fourth Amendment violation in suspicionless border vehicle search that included disassembling gas tank); cf. Muehler v. Mena,—U.S.-,-, 125 S.Ct. 1465, 1471, 161 L.Ed.2d 299 (2005) (no Fourth Amendment violation when occupant detained in handcuffs during several hour search). In light of those intervening Supreme Court rulings, there was no unlawful detention, and all the challenged evidence was properly admitted.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
127 F. App'x 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-iruretagoyena-ca9-2005.