United States v. Jenkins
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10431
1st Cir.2012Background
- Officer observed a van with a blue light-like device visual cue near I-295; stop followed and driver Jenkins gave misleading identity and documents.
- Van contained a blue suction cup, a blue placard, and a chrome rearview mirror contributing to suspicion of a violation of Maine blue-light statute.
- Jenkins admitted no valid license and provided false information; he was arrested for driving without a license.
- Warrant application led to search of the van, yielding a 9 mm pistol, ammunition, and a marijuana roach.
- Jenkins was charged federally with unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon; he pled guilty with right to appeal the search evidence.
- District court denied suppression; the court treated kidnapping in New Mexico as a crime of violence for sentencing purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion | Jenkins: no reasonable suspicion | Jenkinss rely on initial blue-light suspicion | Stop supported by reasonable suspicion |
| Whether detention persisted beyond probable cause after no blue light | Jenkins: detention illegitimate without blue light | Detention justified by evolving suspicion of criminal activity | Detention continued with reasonable suspicion throughout |
| Whether the warrant sufficiently described contraband with particularity | Warrant too general, not particular | Probable cause to seize contraband including firearms observed | Warrant adequate under Fourth Amendment; good-faith exception applies |
| Whether New Mexico kidnapping qualifies as a 'crime of violence' for guideline enhancement | Jenkins: statute may cover non-violent conduct | Statute fits generic kidnapping; counts as violence for guidelines | New Mexico kidnapping falls within generic 'kidnapping' as crime of violence; base level 20 affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Chhien, 266 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2001) (standard for reasonable suspicion in traffic stops)
- United States v. Coplin, 463 F.3d 96 (1st Cir. 2006) (reasonable-mistake-of-fact requirement for stop)
- Massachusetts v. Upton, 466 U.S. 727 (1984) (probable cause review; evidence standard)
- United States v. Morris, 977 F.2d 677 (1st Cir. 1992) (probable cause and specificity in warrants; catch-all not allowed)
- Spinelli v. United States, 382 F.2d 871 (8th Cir. 1967) (necessity of describing contraband with sufficient specificity)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 177 (2004) (requirement to identify when lawfully detained)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (generic vs. specific scope in kidnapping analysis)
- Ortega, 817 P.2d 1212 (N.M. 1991) (holding for service linked to kidnapping intent)
- United States v. Soto-Sanchez, 623 F.3d 317 (6th Cir. 2010) (holding-for-service kidnapping fits generic kidnapping)
- De Jesus Ventura, 565 F.3d 870 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (definition elements of generic kidnapping)