Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Allen, 94 F.3d 640, 1st Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views1 page
    Carlton Allen appealed his conviction for possession of an illegal short barrel shotgun, arguing that the shotgun was found during a pretextual traffic stop. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in a per curiam opinion. The court summarized that under the recent Supreme Court decision in Whren v. United States, pretextual stops do not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as police have probable cause to make the stop. The court therefore affirmed the lower court's judgment against Allen based on the controlling Whren precedent.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-08-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 94 F.3d 640 Docket: 96-1263

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Carlton Allen appealed his conviction for possession of an illegal short barrel shotgun, arguing that the shotgun was found during a pretextual traffic stop. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in a per curiam opinion. The court summarized that under the recent Supreme Court decision in Whren v. United States, pretextual stops do not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as police have probable cause to make the stop. The court therefore affirmed the lower court's judgment against Allen based on the controlling Whren precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views1 page

    United States v. Allen, 94 F.3d 640, 1st Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Carlton Allen appealed his conviction for possession of an illegal short barrel shotgun, arguing that the shotgun was found during a pretextual traffic stop. The First Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in a per curiam opinion. The court summarized that under the recent Supreme Court decision in Whren v. United States, pretextual stops do not violate the Fourth Amendment as long as police have probable cause to make the stop. The court therefore affirmed the lower court's judgment against Allen based on the controlling Whren precedent.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    94 F.

    3d 640

    NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished


    opinions may be cited only in related cases.
    UNITED STATES, Appellee,
    v.
    Carlton E. ALLEN, Defendant, Appellant.
    No. 96-1263.

    United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.


    Aug. 22, 1996.

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE


    DISTRICT OF MAINE
    Robert A. Levine on brief for appellant.
    Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, Jonathan R. Chapman and F.
    Mark Terison, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief for appellee.
    D.Me.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before TORRUELLA, Chief Judge, CYR and STAHL, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    The defendant appeals his conviction for possession of a short barrel shotgun in
    violation of 26 U.S.C. 5861(d), contending that the gun was found as the
    result of a pretextual stop of his vehicle by the police. Because this case is
    controlled by the recent decision in Whren v. United States, 116 S.Ct. 1769
    (1996), we affirm the judgment below.

    Affirmed. Loc. R. 27.1.

    You might also like