Filed: Apr. 28, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 09-13876 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT APRIL 28, 2010 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 07-00058-CR-CDL-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MASTER MICHAEL RAMSEY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia _ (April 28, 2010) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Master Mich
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 09-13876 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT APRIL 28, 2010 Non-Argument Calendar JOHN LEY _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 07-00058-CR-CDL-4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MASTER MICHAEL RAMSEY, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia _ (April 28, 2010) Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Master Micha..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 09-13876 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
APRIL 28, 2010
Non-Argument Calendar
JOHN LEY
________________________
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 07-00058-CR-CDL-4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MASTER MICHAEL RAMSEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia
_________________________
(April 28, 2010)
Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Master Michael Ramsey appeals his convictions for felony murder, 18
U.S.C. § 1111, kidnapping,
id. § 1201, murder with a firearm during a crime of
violence,
id. §§ 924(c)(1), (j), robbery,
id. § 2111, theft of a motor vehicle,
id.
§ 2119, and conspiracy to commit robbery,
id. §§ 2111, 371. Ramsey argues that
the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized from his
vehicle. We affirm.
Ramsey argues that the search of his vehicle was invalid under state law and
rendered the search unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, but this argument
fails. The failure of law enforcement officers to comply with the demands of state
law regarding the search and seizure of property does not affect the admissibility of
evidence in federal court. United States v. Gilbert,
942 F.2d 1537, 1541 (11th Cir.
1991). Evidence is admissible so long as it was not “obtained by state officers
during a search which, if conducted by federal officers, would have violated the
defendant’s immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth
Amendment,” Elkins v. United States,
364 U.S. 206, 223–24,
80 S. Ct. 1437, 1447
(1960), and Ramsey does not argue that the search or seizure otherwise violated the
Fourth Amendment. The district court did not err by admitting at trial the evidence
seized from Ramsey’s vehicle.
Ramsey’s convictions are AFFIRMED.
2