United States v. Holleman, No. 13-1317 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant conditionally pled guilty to possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute. On appeal, defendant challenged the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The court concluded that there was probable cause for the initial traffic stop where the trooper testified that defendant was driving in excess of the posted speed limit; the district court did not err in denying the request to suppress evidence on the grounds that an unreasonable extension of the first traffic stop tainted the subsequent investigation; the second dog sniff was supported by probable cause; any infirmities in the search warrant were irrelevant because the search of the vehicle fell within the automobile exception to the search warrant requirement; and defendant was not in custody at the time officers asked him questions while he was in his truck, and therefore, defendant's Miranda rights were not violated. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. Initial traffic stop was supported by probable cause as defendant was speeding at the time of the stop; trooper did not unreasonably extend the length of the initial stop to conduct a drug dog sniff; challenges to second drug dog sniff rejected; district court did not err when it determined the search of defendant's truck fell within the automobile exception to the search warrant requirement; defendant was not in custody at the time he made certain statements to the officers.
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.