Legal Opinion
United States v. Abdullah Mansur
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided March 25, 2010No. 08-3872UnpublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McKEAGUE, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Abdullah Mansur argues that the district court: (1) should have suppressed the evidence of his possession of a firearm because the firearm was seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment; and (2) erred in giving him an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Because the officer did not violate the Fourth Amendment when he seized the firearm, and because attempted robbery is a violent felony for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), we AFFIRM the district court’s decision denying Mansur’s motion to suppress and AFFIRM Mansur’s sentence.
I.…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Shepard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Brendlin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. McMurrayCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- Michael Hill v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- McKenna v. EdgellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2010
- United States v. GrossCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. Willie YatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.