United States v. Saavedra, 549 F. App'x 739

Around 1:00 a.m., deputies stopped a Lexus for a defective license-plate light; the driver (Howard) made furtive movements and a handgun was observed in plain view under the driver’s seat. Howard fled and was arrested.
Saavedra (rear passenger) was removed, patted down, handcuffed, and placed in a patrol car for officer safety while deputies pursued Howard and inventoried the vehicle per policy.
Inventory search of the Lexus revealed a second loaded Bryco .380 handgun beside Saavedra’s seat, a tin with individually wrapped bags later tested as heroin, and eight 9mm rounds (location in vehicle unclear).
After the inventory search, deputies arrested Saavedra, searched him, and found a small electronic drug scale in his pocket.
Saavedra was indicted on three counts: felon in possession of a firearm/ammunition (18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1)), possession with intent to distribute heroin (21 U.S.C. §841), and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking crime (18 U.S.C. §924(c)). He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 488 months.
On appeal Saavedra conceded the inventory search and possession of the Bryco and heroin were valid, but challenged (1) the admissibility of the scale as fruit of an unlawful arrest when he was handcuffed/placed in the squad car, and (2) sufficiency of evidence regarding possession of the 9mm ammunition.

Issue	Saavedra’s Argument	Government’s Argument	Held
Whether placing Saavedra in handcuffs and the patrol car was an unlawful custodial arrest that required suppression of the scale	The handcuffing/placement was a custodial arrest without probable cause; the scale is fruit of that unlawful arrest and should be suppressed	The detention was a lawful investigative detention supported by reasonable suspicion; inventory search and subsequent probable cause validated the later arrest and search	Affirmed: detention was justified by reasonable suspicion; scale admissible because inventory search produced probable cause and search incident to arrest was lawful
Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Saavedra knowingly possessed the 9mm ammunition alleged in Count 1	The government failed to prove Saavedra possessed the 9mm rounds (location unclear; rounds did not match his known gun)	Even if 9mm possession wasn’t proved, the government proved possession of the Bryco .380 (and .380 ammo), which is sufficient under the disjunctive statutory offense	Affirmed: conviction sustained because proof Saavedra possessed the .380 handgun (or .380 ammo) satisfies §922(g)(1) even if 9mm not proven

Cortez v. McCauley, 478 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2007) (three types of police–citizen encounters; investigatory detention vs. arrest)
Lundstrom v. Romero, 616 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2010) (handcuffing may be appropriate during investigatory detention; detention to maintain status quo)
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (scope of search incident to arrest includes area within arrestee’s immediate control)
Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (reasonable suspicion standard; officers need not rule out innocent conduct)
Michel, 446 F.3d 1122 (10th Cir.) (elements of §922(g) and constructive possession)
Pauldino, 443 F.2d 1108 (10th Cir.) (a disjunctive statutory offense may be charged conjunctively but proved disjunctively)