United States v. Orozco, No. 12-1170 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of two counts of possessing cocaine with intent to deliver. On appeal, defendant argued that evidence discovered in a vehicle search should have been suppressed and that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. Defendant also argued that he should have received the benefit of the amended cocaine-base provisions in the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, 124 Stat. 2372. The court rejected defendant's arguments regarding the suppression issue and the sufficiency of the evidence but remanded to the district court to address the applicability of the Act given the retroactivity of the Act as determined by the Supreme Court in Dorsey v. United States. The court also denied the motion for replacement counsel.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law and Sentencing. Initial traffic stop and later-acquired consent were valid and the officer did not impermissibly extend the stop without reasonable articulable suspicion; evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute; remanded to permit the district court to address the applicability of Dorsey v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2321 (2012) and the possibility of resentencing.
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.