Filed: Apr. 08, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 02-3013 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Sergio Medina-Olvera, * [UNPUBLISHED] a/k/a Sergio Olvera Medina, * * Appellant. * _ Submitted: February 11, 2003 Filed: April 8, 2003 _ Before WOLLMAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Sergio Medina-Olvera (Medina) pleaded guilty to possession with the intent to distribute
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 02-3013 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Sergio Medina-Olvera, * [UNPUBLISHED] a/k/a Sergio Olvera Medina, * * Appellant. * _ Submitted: February 11, 2003 Filed: April 8, 2003 _ Before WOLLMAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Sergio Medina-Olvera (Medina) pleaded guilty to possession with the intent to distribute o..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 02-3013
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Minnesota.
Sergio Medina-Olvera, * [UNPUBLISHED]
a/k/a Sergio Olvera Medina, *
*
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: February 11, 2003
Filed: April 8, 2003
___________
Before WOLLMAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Sergio Medina-Olvera (Medina) pleaded guilty to possession with the intent
to distribute over 500 grams of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and
(b)(1)(B) and was sentenced to ninety months’ imprisonment.1 In entering his plea,
Medina reserved his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence that
was seized from his residence and vehicle pursuant to a search warrant. After
1
The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.
reviewing the record and the parties’ arguments, we are satisfied that the information
included in the warrant application and affidavit was sufficient to support a finding
of probable cause for the issuance of the warrant. Because we believe that an
extended recitation of the facts and the applicable legal principles would have no
precedential value in this fact-intensive case, we affirm without any further
discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
-2-