Willix Walker appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his motion to suppress bullets, a face mask, and a handgun, arguing that police lacked reasonable suspicion to initiate the investigative stop of him that had resulted in seizure of the foregoing evidence. Having carefully reviewed the record and considered Walker’s arguments, we find no basis for reversal. See United States v. Littrell, 439 F.3d 875, 881 (8th Cir. 2006) (clear-error review of district court’s factual findings in support of its denial of motion to suppress, and de novo review of its legal conclusion about whether Fourth Amendment was violated).

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