United States v. Norman E. Van Zee
This text of United States v. Norman E. Van Zee (United States v. Norman E. Van Zee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________
No. 03-3640 ___________
United States of America, * * Plaintiff - Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of South Dakota. Norman Eugene Van Zee, * * Defendant - Appellant. * ___________
Submitted: May 11, 2004 Filed: August 17, 2004 (corrected 8/18/04) ___________
Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BRIGHT and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________
LOKEN, Chief Judge.
After the district court1 denied his motion to suppress following an evidentiary hearing, Norman Eugene Van Zee entered a conditional plea of guilty to the charge of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Van Zee now appeals, arguing that the district court should have suppressed evidence seized during a warrantless search of his vehicle and additional
1 The HONORABLE LAWRENCE L. PIERSOL, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, adopting the Report and Recommendation of the HONORABLE JOHN E. SIMKO, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of South Dakota.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Norman E. Van Zee, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-norman-e-van-zee-ca8-2004.