Filed: Apr. 12, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40854 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHRISTOPHER A. WELLS, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:94-CR-57-3 - - - - - - - - - - April 24, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Christopher A. Wells appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evide
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-40854 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CHRISTOPHER A. WELLS, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:94-CR-57-3 - - - - - - - - - - April 24, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Christopher A. Wells appeals the district court's denial of his motion to suppress eviden..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-40854
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHRISTOPHER A. WELLS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:94-CR-57-3
- - - - - - - - - -
April 24, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Christopher A. Wells appeals the district court's denial of
his motion to suppress evidence seized during the search of his
apartment. He contends that the search of his apartment was
conducted without sufficient consent and alternatively, that the
seizure of the evidence, pursuant to the plain-view doctrine, was
not appropriate because the agents were not lawfully within his
apartment and certain items seized were not obvious evidence of a
crime. The district court's findings that the consent provided
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-40854
-2-
for the search was valid, that the officers were legally admitted
to the apartment, and that the seizure of the challenged items
was lawful were not clearly erroneous. United States v. Matlock,
415 U.S. 164, 171-72 n.7 (1974); United States v. Kelley,
981
F.2d 1464, 1470 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
113 S. Ct. 2427 (1993).
The district court properly denied Wells's motion to suppress.
AFFIRMED.