Opinion ID: 4513934
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Search of the Outdoor Trash Cart

Text: Mr. Hervey challenges the search of the trash cart. We reject this challenge because Mr. Hervey failed to preserve the issue. To challenge the introduction of evidence in a criminal case, the appellant must have raised the issue in a pretrial motion to suppress. When the appellant omits an issue from the motion to suppress, appellate review is waived. Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3)(C); see United States v. Bowline, 917 F.3d 1227, 1234 (10th Cir. 2019); United States v. Vance, 893 F.3d 763, 769–70 (10th Cir. 2018). In district court, Mr. Hervey did not ever object to the initial search of the outdoor trash cart. We thus conclude that Mr. Hervey has waived his challenge to the introduction of evidence from the warrantless search of the trash cart. referred to as ecstasy during the hearing on Mr. Hervey’s motion to suppress. The government’s brief refers to the substance as ecstasy (except when listing the charges in the indictment). But methamphetamine and ecstasy are distinct drugs, appearing in different schedules under the Controlled Substance Act. See 21 U.S.C. § 812; 21 C.F.R. §§ 1308.11, 1308.12; see also Drug Scheduling, DEA, https://www.dea.gov/drugscheduling. Because Mr. Hervey’s conviction was not based on the pills, we need not resolve this inconsistency in the record. 4