Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Demone TERRELL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-06-06
Citations: 280 F. App'x 437
Docket Number: No. 07-30847
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Demone TERRELL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 280
Pages: 437–438

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Demone TERRELL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-30847
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 6, 2008.
Allison Duncan Bushnell, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Betty Lee Marak, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Demone Terrell pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute MDMA, also known as Ecstasy, and was sentenced to 51 months of imprisonment. He reserved the right to appeal the district court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained through the seizure of a package at a private express shipping facility.
Terrell contends that police lacked reasonable suspicion to seize the package and hold it for 20 to 30 minutes until a drug-sniffing dog arrived to provide probable cause for a search. Under the totality of the circumstances, and in light of acknowledged criteria for recognizing illicit drug packages, the police had reasonable suspicion to detain the package as they did. See United States v. Van Leeuwen, 397 U.S. 249, 250-51, 90 S.Ct. 1029, 25 L.Ed.2d 282 (1970); United States v. Daniel, 982 F.2d 146, 149-51 (5th Cir.1993).
The district court did not err by denying the motion to suppress. The judgment is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.