United States v. Corey Cornell Maness
United States v. Corey Cornell Maness
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-4668
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
COREY CORNELL MANESS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-99-70)
Submitted: February 29, 2000 Decided: March 14, 2000
Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert B. Rigney, Kelly L. Daniels, PROTOGYROU & RIGNEY, P.L.C., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Helen F. Fahey, United States Attorney, Laura M. Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Appellant, Corey Cornell Maness, appeals from the criminal
judgment convicting him of one count of possession with intent to
distribute cocaine base in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1994).
On appeal, Maness challenges the district court’s denial of his
motion to suppress the crack found in his vehicle and the voluntary
statements he made as a result of the search. Maness argues that
the evidence adduced at the hearing does not support a finding that
the officers had an articulable suspicion to stop his vehicle and
that the district court used an incorrect standard to determine
whether the stop was justified. He further argues that the officer
executing the search exceeded the scope of his authority and pur-
pose of the stop by opening the vehicle door without probable cause
that Maness was involved in a criminal activity.
After reviewing the record, we find that the district court
did not err in denying the motion to suppress, and affirm on the
reasoning of the district court. See JA 105-16. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished