Filed: Jan. 24, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50463 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JUAN MARTIN RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-98-CR-269-1 - January 23, 2001 Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Juan Martin Rodriguez contends the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress. Evidence was seized from Rodrigu
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-50463 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JUAN MARTIN RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. A-98-CR-269-1 - January 23, 2001 Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Juan Martin Rodriguez contends the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress. Evidence was seized from Rodrigue..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-50463
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN MARTIN RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. A-98-CR-269-1
--------------------
January 23, 2001
Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Martin Rodriguez contends the district court erred by
denying his motion to suppress. Evidence was seized from
Rodriguez’s residence pursuant to a warrant that was obtained
based on information known to officers prior to their initial
entry into Rodriguez’s residence. Although the warrant
application contained a fact that became known to officers only
after their initial entry, the warrant is sufficient when this
fact is excised from it. Consequently, the district court did
not err in denying the motion. See Segura v. United States, 468
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-50463
-2-
U.S. 796 (1984), United States v. Carrion,
809 F.2d 1120 (5th
Cir. 1987), United States v. Restrepo,
966 F.2d 964 (5th Cir.
1992). Accordingly, the judgment of the lower court is AFFIRMED.