United States v. Jose Rodriguez

695 F. App'x 339
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedAugust 16, 2017
Docket15-50328
StatusUnpublished

This text of 695 F. App'x 339 (United States v. Jose Rodriguez) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Jose Rodriguez, 695 F. App'x 339 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

The officers had a particularized and objective basis for suspecting the driver of the car in which Rodriguez was riding of breaking the law, and they therefore had a “reasonable suspicion” sufficient to lawfully stop the vehicle. See Cal. Vehicle Code §§ 5200, 4456(c), 11715; see also Helen v. N. Carolina, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 530, 536, 190 L.Ed.2d 475 (2014). The officers lawfully asked Rodriguez to step out of the car for the duration of the stop. See Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 110-111 & n.6, 98 S.Ct. 330, 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977). Rodriguez dropped drugs as he exited. When the officers found the drugs, they had probable cause to arrest him, and the subsequent search of the car in which he had been a passenger was lawful. See United States v. Pinela-Hernandez, 262 F.3d 974, 977-79 (9th Cir. 2001). The district court properly denied Rodriguez’s motion to suppress the evidence found in the car and the statements he made after his arrest. See id.

AFFIRMED.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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

Pennsylvania v. Mimms
434 U.S. 106 (Supreme Court, 1977)
United States v. Alberto Pinela-Hernandez
262 F.3d 974 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)
Heien v. North Carolina
135 S. Ct. 530 (Supreme Court, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
695 F. App'x 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jose-rodriguez-ca9-2017.