United States v. Mayo
2010 WL 5059592
8th Cir.2010Background
- In September 2009, trooper stopped Braiske for a seatbelt violation in a minivan carrying Mayo.
- Braiske showed signs of nervousness; Mayo exhibited labored breathing, sweating, and avoidance of eye contact.
- Both defendants gave inconsistent travel histories; Braiske had a prior drug conviction; a 'lived-in' minivan suggested long travel by drug couriers.
- Troopers discovered drug-typical packaging (bindles) in plain view, and later found MDMA in six packages hidden in the doors.
- The district court denied suppression, rejecting challenges to consent, scope of search, and probable cause under the automobile exception.
- On appeal, Mayo and Braiske challenge consent scope, potential withdrawal of consent, and the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for automobile search | Braiske argues facts show only suspicion, not probable cause. | Braiske asserts the search exceeds permissible scope without probable cause. | Probable cause supported; search valid under automobile exception. |
| Scope of Braiske's consent | Consent did not authorize pulling back door panels. | Consent to search the minivan extended to areas where drugs might be stored. | Search within scope; panels opened in minimally intrusive manner were permitted. |
| Withdrawal of consent / detention duration | Detention before search and lack of withdrawal opportunity violated Fourth Amendment. | No clear objection to consent; detention was reasonable and withdrawal not necessary. | Mayo waived these issues; no plain error in district court's approach. |
| Standing to challenge the search | Mayo as a passenger has standing to challenge the search. | Challenge based on consent scope and voluntariness; standing contested. | Waived; not argued in motion to suppress and thus not preserved. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Fladten, 230 F.3d 1083 (8th Cir. 2000) (probable cause for automobile search under automobile exception)
- United States v. Sanchez, 417 F.3d 971 (8th Cir. 2005) (reasonable suspicion to expand traffic stop)
- United States v. Lebrun, 261 F.3d 731 (8th Cir. 2001) (nervous behavior supports reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Ferrer-Montoya, 483 F.3d 565 (8th Cir. 2007) (scope of consent to search includes containers and compartments within a vehicle)
- United States v. Lopez-Mendoza, 601 F.3d 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (detention duration during traffic stop up to reasonableness)
- United States v. McCarty, 612 F.3d 1020 (8th Cir. 2010) (motion to suppress waiver and preservation of issues)