Defendant appealed from the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence of heroin seized from a rental car defendant had been driving that was stopped by police during a traffic stop.
Where defendant had permission from his wife to operate the vehicle, he had standing to challenge the traffic stop and search, but defendant’s actions — including giving false identification and changing his story — and a positive canine alert were sufficient to give police probable cause for a search.
Shepherd, J., concurring: “I concur in the court’s opinion, including the conclusion reached in Section II that Bettis has standing to challenge the search of the vehicle. However, I do not join the court’s discussion in Section II, and I would simply find that the issue is controlled by Muhammad, 58 F.3d at 355, and Best, 135 F.3d at 1225”.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Bettis (MLW No. 74399/Case No. 18-2407 – 10 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Kobes, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, Wright, J. (Frederick J. Goetz, of Minneapolis, MN for appellant) (Jeffrey S. Paulsen, AUSA, of Minneapolis, MN for appellee)