Opinion ID: 3163198
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: E. 329 at 10 (alterations added).

Text: Mr. Partin raises four issues on appeal. First, he argues that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress his pre-Miranda statements to officers because the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to stop him, and even if they had reasonable suspicion, the stop matured into a custodial detention before he was 10 Case: 15-11008 Date Filed: 12/16/2015 Page: 11 of 23 given his Miranda warnings. Second, Mr. Partin contends that the district court abused its discretion by admitting DNA evidence demonstrating that he was the father of A.L.’s child because the evidence was not relevant and because its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value. Third, Mr. Partin asserts that the district court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal because the government did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he transported A.L. out of state with the intent to engage in unlawful activity with her. Finally, Mr. Partin claims that the district court erred in applying a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice.