United States v. Barraza-Maldonado, No. 12-3903 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pled guilty to possessing a controlled substance with intent to distribute. On appeal, defendant challenged the district court's denial of his motion to suppress cocaine and other evidence found after a traffic stop of a borrowed car he was driving. The court concluded that the district court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress because the evidence seized as a result of the installation and monitoring of the GPS device was admissible under the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal Case - suppression. Assuming without deciding that DEA agents violated defendant's Fourth Amendment rights by installing a global positioning system device without a warrant and monitoring of car's movement as it traveled from Arizona to Minnesota, the district court properly denied a motion to suppress evidence found in the vehicle because the evidence seized as a result of the installation and monitoring was admissible under the good faith exception to the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule. At the time the GPS device was installed in Arizona, Ninth Circuit law provided that such installation did not constitute a Fourth Amendment search.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.