USA v. Richard White


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-20810 Affirmed ] Judge: EGJ , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH Mandate issue date is 12/05/2017 for Appellant Richard James White [16-20810]

Download PDF
Case: 16-20810 Document: 00514233890 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/13/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-20810 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fif h Circuit FILED November 13, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RICHARD JAMES WHITE, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:13-CR-597-49 Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Richard James White appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction of possession with intent to distribute 50 kilograms or more of marijuana for which he was sentenced to 18 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. He appeals the denial of his motion to suppress the marijuana discovered by law enforcement at an immigration checkpoint. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 16-20810 Document: 00514233890 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/13/2017 No. 16-20810 The district court did not err in denying White’s motion to suppress. See United States v. Jaime, 473 F.3d 178, 181 (5th Cir. 2006). White’s detention in the primary inspection lane was within the permissible duration of an immigration checkpoint stop. See United States v. Machuca-Barrera, 261 F.3d 425, 431-35 (5th Cir. 2001). The dog’s alerts provided probable cause for a warrantless search of the tractor-trailer’s spare tire. See United States v. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d 206, 207-09 (5th Cir. 1990). Accordingly, we do not need to address White’s alternative argument that the search of the spare tire exceeded the scope of his consent. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?