U.S. v. Borjas, 99-4024
| Decision Date | 16 March 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-4024,99-4024 |
| Citation | 209 F.3d 698 |
| Parties | (8th Cir. 2000) United States of America, Appellee, v. Vicente Marchena-Borjas, Appellant. Submitted: |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska
Before McMILLIAN, FLOYD R. GIBSON, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
Vicente Marchena-Borjas appeals from a final judgment entered in the United States District Court 1 for the District of Nebraska upon his conditional guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846. See United States v. Marchena-Borjas, No. 8:98CR137-1 (D. Neb. Nov. 1, 1999). For reversal, Marchena-Borjas. argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of his warrantless arrest and the subsequent warrantless search of the vehicle in which he had been a passenger. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.
Marchena-Borjas was indicted on June 18, 1998, on one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. He filed a motion to suppress, arguing that he was arrested and the vehicle was searched without any probable cause and in the absence of a valid search or arrest warrant. On October 5, and November 10, 1998, suppression hearings were held before a magistrate judge 2 on this motion, as well as other motions filed by his co-defendant, Joel Barone-Hermosillo. The magistrate judge also permitted post-hearing oral arguments on the motions on March 12, 1999. Witnesses testifying at the suppression hearing included six officers from city and county police departments in the Omaha, Nebraska, area as well as one special agent of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration. Based upon the evidence presented, the magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation containing the following findings of fact. See id. at 2-12 (Apr. 28, 1999) ("Report and Recommendation").
On the early afternoon of May 8, 1998, a confidential informant reported to Omaha police officers that a Hispanic male named "Vicente" was in possession of methamphetamine that day at a certain trailer court in Bellevue, Nebraska (later identified as 1513 Fort Crook Road, Trailer #1). The confidential informant further stated that, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Vicente would deliver the methamphetamine, driving a silver Oldsmobile mini-van with Nebraska license plates numbered "18-U672" from the Bellevue trailer court to the parking lot of a grocery store on the northeast corner of 36th and Q Streets in Omaha.
Based on this information, local officers set up surveillance at the Bellevue trailer court. At 7:45 p.m., two men with dark hair and dark complexions were observed leaving Trailer #1 and getting into a silver Oldsmobile mini-van with license plates numbered "18-U672." The mini-van was under intermittent surveillance as it traveled from the trailer court to the parking lot at 36th and Q Streets. Officers did not observe the mini-van commit any traffic violations.
After the mini-van pulled into the parking lot, the driver and passenger exited. Surveillance officers who were waiting at the lot immediately pulled their own vehicle behind the mini-van and exited with their weapons drawn. The driver (later identified as Barone-Hermosillo) was detained and handcuffed immediately after exiting the van. The passenger (later identified as Marchena-Borjas) wandered around the front of the parking lot and then walked back toward the van. Officers detained and handcuffed him after he was identified by other officers as the van's other occupant. After searching the van's interior and finding no contraband, the officers looked under the hood of the vehicle and found a plastic grocery bag containing two one-pound bundles of methamphetamine stuffed into the engine compartment on the driver's side.
The magistrate judge concluded that the officers had probable cause to arrest Marchena-Borjas and to search the vehicle in which he was a passenger. The magistrate judge found probable cause for the arrest given the reliability of the confidential informant, the specificity of detail provided by the informant, and the officers' independent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Byrd v. Commonwealth of Va.., Record No. 2197–08–1.
...of the trailer, for the purpose of receiving the shipment of marijuana located in the informant's trailer); United States v. Marchena–Borjas, 209 F.3d 698, 699–700 (8th Cir.2000) (informant reported that a named Hispanic male was in possession of methamphetamine at a certain trailer park, a......
-
Byrd v. Com.
...of the trailer, for the purpose of receiving the shipment of marijuana located in the informant's trailer); United States v. Marchena-Borjas, 209 F.3d 698, 699-700 (8th Cir.2000) (a reliable informant advised that a named Hispanic male was in possession of methamphetamine at a certain trail......
-
U.S. v. Barnes, 03-2501.
...other hand, Belton has been deemed insufficient authority to justify searching the engine compartment of a van, United States v. Marchena-Borjas, 209 F.3d 698, 700 (8th Cir.2000), searching the trailer compartment of a tractor-trailer, United States v. Hernandez, 901 F.2d 1217, 1220 (5th Ci......
-
United States v. Williams
...are “reachable without exiting.” United States v. Russell, 670 F.2d 323, 327 (D.C.Cir.1982) ; see also United States v. Marchena–Borjas, 209 F.3d 698, 700 (8th Cir.2000) (the rule of New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454, 460 n. 4, 101 S.Ct. 2860, 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981) provides insufficient just......
-
The U.S. Supreme Court gets it right in Arizona v. Gant: justifications for rules protect constitutional rights.
...his raincoat pocket). (131.) Belfort, 453 U.S. at 461. (132.) Silk, supra note 20, at 301. (133.) See United States v. Marchena-Borjas, 209 F.3d 698, 700 (8th Cir. 2000) (holding that Belton was insufficient to justify search of engine compartment of a van); see also United States v. Patter......