Legal Opinion

United States v. Winningham

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided April 6, 1998No. 97-2105PublishedCited by 61 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PORFILIO, Circuit Judge.

The government appeals a district court order suppressing evidence obtained by using a trained dog to perform a roadside search of a van. The government argues: (1) United States v. Stone, 866 F.2d 359 (10th Cir.1989), controls this case and places the drug dog’s activity outside the scope of the Fourth Amendment; and (2), in any event, the driver’s consent cures any potential Fourth Amendment violation. We conclude Stone does not apply in this instance and the consent was involuntarily given. We therefore affirm.

I. Background

Acting on information, New Mexico border…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. United States v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. United States v. Jaime Soto, Also Known as Leonel GuerraCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
  4. Floyd Bolton v. Scrivner, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
  5. United States v. McRaeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by61 opinions

  1. Felders v. MalcomCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  2. Fitzgerald v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
  3. State v. WiegandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  4. United States v. James S. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
  5. United States v. Iris Collette Jackson Dwight Dean JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000

56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API