Court Opinion

ID: 2966177
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:50:06.405193+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:00:36.904461
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

       [NOT FOR PUBLICATIONNOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
                 United States Court of Appeals
                     For the First Circuit

No. 99-1067

                          UNITED STATES,

                            Appellee,

                                v.

                         LUIS A. RIVERA,

                      Defendant, Appellant.

           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                 FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

           [Hon. Ernest C. Torres, U.S. District Judge]

                              Before

                      Selya, Circuit Judge,
                Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,
                   and Lipez, Circuit Judge.
                                
                                
                                
                                
     
     Allan M. Tow on brief for appellant.
     Margaret E. Curran, United States Attorney, Donald C. Lockhart
and Gerard B. Sullivan, Assistant United States Attorneys, on brief
for appellees.

February 2, 2000

                                
  
            Per Curiam.   After a thorough review of the record
  and of the parties' submissions, we affirm.  We find no error
  in the lower court's conclusion that police did not exceed the
  scope of the search warrant by looking through a bag found in
  appellant's car or in the glove compartment.  "A warrant to
  search a vehicle . . . support[s] a search of every part of the
  vehicle that might contain the object of the search."  United
  States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 821 (1982).  Once an officer
  conducting a search in a lawful manner discovers evidence in
  plain view providing probable cause of a crime, that evidence
  may be seized.  United States v. Robles, 45 F.3d 1, 6 (1st Cir.
  1995).  This court lacks jurisdiction to consider appellant's
  challenge to his sentence.  United States v. Rosario-Peralta,
   F.3d , 1999 WL 1215238 (1st Cir. 1999).
            Affirmed.  1st Cir. Loc. R. 27(c).