Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Glen Allen
Citations: 705 F.3d 367; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2391; 2013 WL 399243Docket: 12-1663
Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit; February 4, 2013; Federal Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Glen Ray Allen appealed the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his vehicle during a traffic stop initiated by law enforcement. On March 30, 2010, Arkansas State Police Officer Adam Pinner, part of a drug interdiction team, observed Allen driving a green SUV on Interstate 30. Officer Pinner suspected the SUV was a rental vehicle due to its new condition and lack of dealer insignia. After pacing the SUV at 75 mph in a 70 mph zone, he noted a white minivan ahead, which he also suspected to be a rental based on similar indicators. Both vehicles had Texas license plates, a state known for narcotics trafficking. Officer Pinner initiated a stop on the white minivan after observing it cross the fog line and noted an overwhelming odor of marijuana from inside, leading to the driver’s arrest. He radioed for the green SUV to be stopped, suspecting it was linked to the minivan. Officer Eric Henson subsequently stopped Allen's green SUV, which had been rented on the same day from the same location as the minivan. Following an inventory search of the SUV, multiple cellular phones and SIM cards were discovered. Allen was charged with conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Allen's motion to suppress the evidence was based on the argument that the traffic stops lacked probable cause. The district court ruled that he lacked standing to challenge the search of the white minivan, as he did not establish a reasonable expectation of privacy in that vehicle. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s decision. The district court found probable cause for stopping the green SUV based on Officer Pinner’s testimony that Allen was driving at seventy-five miles per hour in a seventy-mile-per-hour zone. Allen pleaded guilty while preserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence. The review of the motion denial involves assessing the district court's factual findings for clear error and determining if there was a Fourth Amendment violation de novo. Although Allen argued that it was clear error to accept Officer Pinner’s testimony regarding his speed—citing the absence of an immediate stop, mentions of speeding during the encounter, or references in the police report—the stop was nonetheless justified by reasonable suspicion of marijuana trafficking. A Terry stop requires reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity, supported by specific facts that warrant the intrusion. Officers can rely on information from other officers in their investigation. In this case, the stop of the green SUV was reasonable given its potential connection to a white minivan that had been observed with a large quantity of marijuana. The circumstance mirrored prior cases where tandem vehicles raised reasonable suspicion for stops. The court affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress, concluding that the officers had sufficient specific and articulable facts justifying the stop of the green SUV.