United States of America v. Theodore G. Singleton

Lincoln, Nebraska criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with drug trafficking and firearms offense.



Theodore Singleton pleaded guilty to drug trafficking and firearms offenses, reserving his right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress evidence. We conclude that there was no error, and affirm the judgment of the district court.



The challenged evidence was seized during a traffic stop in December 2021. A state trooper stopped Singleton on Interstate 80 in Nebraska. The trooper, Sutton, testified that he saw Singleton reduce his speed from 74 to 64 miles per hour and momentarily cross the center line by approximately one foot before returning to the left lane. After the stop, Sutton said that he smelled the odor of marijuana when he approached Singleton's vehicle. Troopers searched the vehicle on that basis. They seized 1.81 kilograms of marijuana in plastic bags, a handgun, and various quantities of heroin, morphine, methamphetamine, fentanyl, cocaine base, and cocaine

* * *



Singleton argues finally that even if the traffic stop was valid, the troopers lacked probable cause to search his vehicle. An odor of marijuana emanating from a vehicle establishes probable cause to search. United States v. Williams, 955 F.3d 734, 737 (8th Cir. 2020). Sutton and another trooper, Rice, testified that they smelled the odor of marijuana coming from Singleton's vehicle. Sutton attacks their credibility and points out that there was no evidence of burnt marijuana found in his vehicle. But there is no extrinsic evidence to contradict the troopers' testimony, and the testimony is not internally inconsistent or implausible on its face. See United States v. Harper, 787 F.3d 910, 914 (8th Cir. 2015). The troopers ultimately seized several pounds of marijuana in plastic freezer bags in a backpack in the vehicle's trunk. Under these circumstances, the testimony of the troopers that they smelled the odor of marijuana "is not so implausible that a reasonable fact-finder would not credit the testimony.” United States v. Portmann, 207 F.3d 1032, 1033 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam). The district court's credibility finding was not clearly erroneous, and there was probable cause to search Singleton's vehicle.

Defendant pleaded guilty.



Affirmed