Case ID: f-appx_468/html/0680-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Felix GARCIA-GODOY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-50204.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 7, 2012.
    
    Filed Feb. 9, 2012.
    Ami Sheth, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Michael J. Raphael, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Carlton Gunn, Esquire, Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, O’SCANNLAIN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Felix Garcia-Godoy appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence found during an inventory search of his vehicle.

Contrary to Garcia-Godoy’s assertion, the inventory search in this case was not “for the sole purpose of investigation.” Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 372, 107 S.Ct. 738, 93 L.Ed.2d 739 (1987); United States v. Bowhay, 992 F.2d 229, 231 (9th Cir.1993).

Nor was the district court’s finding that the searching officers followed “standardized procedures” clearly erroneous. See United States v. Ruckes, 586 F.3d 713, 716 (9th Cir.2009); see also United States v. Mancera-Londono, 912 F.2d 373, 375 (9th Cir.1990). It is of no moment that the search was never completed. United States v. Scott, 665 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir.1981).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.