United States v. Jones , 250 F. App'x 579 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-4124
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CORY WILLIAM JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (1:05-cr-00249-1)
Submitted: September 24, 2007 Decided: October 11, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Fredilyn Sison, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC.,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C. F. Shappert,
United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Amy E. Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cory William Jones pled guilty to conspiracy to
manufacture with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation
of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2000), reserving the right to
appeal the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress.
Jones now appeals that denial, arguing that his consent was not
voluntarily given; the officers exceeded the scope of the search;
and the officers used deceptive practices to circumvent the warrant
requirement. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
This court reviews the factual findings underlying a
motion to suppress for clear error, and the district court’s legal
determinations de novo. See Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S.
690, 699 (1996). When a suppression motion has been denied, this
court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the
government. See United States v. Seidman, 156 F.3d 542, 547 (4th
Cir. 1998).
With these standards in mind, and having reviewed the
transcript of the suppression hearing and the parties’ briefs, we
conclude that the district court did not err in denying the motion
to suppress. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
- 2 -
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -