United States v. Vincent Maxwell

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3299

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Vincent Earl Maxwell, * * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 27, 2000 Filed: November 30, 2000

___________

Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Following a conditional guilty plea to possession of false identification documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(3), Vincent Maxwell challenges the district court’s1 denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during a traffic stop. Having carefully reviewed the record, including the testimony presented at the suppression hearing, we agree with the district court that the evidence was admissible. See United States v. Wicker, 80 F.3d 263, 268 (8th Cir. 1996) (credibility of

1 The Honorable Stephen M. Reasoner, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

witnesses); United States v. Allegree, 175 F.3d 648, 650 (8th Cir.) (if officer’s suspicions are aroused during routine traffic stop, he may expand scope of questioning and voluntary consent to search is valid), cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 399 (1999); Ark. Code Ann. § 27-16-302 (Michie 1994) (possession of fictitious driver’s license is misdemeanor); Curd v. City Court of Judsonia, Arkansas, 141 F.3d 839, 842 (8th Cir.) (police may perform warrantless search incident to arrest on all property in arrestee’s immediate control), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 888 (1998).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.