Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto FERRERA-ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-06-18
Citations: 101 F. App'x 247
Docket Number: No. 03-10467; D.C. No. CR-02-00127-RLH/LRL
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto FERRERA-ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 101
Pages: 247–248

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alberto FERRERA-ORTIZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-10467.
D.C. No. CR-02-00127-RLH/LRL.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 15, 2004.
Decided June 18, 2004.
Daniel G. Bogden, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Thomas F. Pitaro, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The district court did not err by denying Ferrera-Ortiz's motion to suppress. Based on the totality of the information known to officers at the time of the search, the police had probable cause to believe Ferrera-Ortiz's car contained contraband. See Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983). The warrantless search was therefore permissible under the automobile exception. See California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565, 580, 111 S.Ct. 1982, 114 L.Ed.2d 619 (1991).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.