Court Opinion

ID: 2961386
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 20:42:40.636973+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:41:49.767234
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

          May 20, 1992                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                                 ____________________        No. 91-2322                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                 ODINA FANA ALMANZAR,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND                     [Hon. Joseph L. Tauro, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                 Breyer, Chief Judge,                                         ___________                           Campbell, Senior Circuit Judge,                                     ____________________                                Selya, Circuit Judge.                                       _____________                                 ____________________            Joseph  A. Bevilacqua,  Jr. and  William  J.  Murphy on  brief for            ___________________________      ___________________        appellant.            Lincoln C. Almond,  United States Attorney, and Zechariah  Chafee,            _________________                               _________________        Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.   Defendant's actions,  as observed  by                      __________            Detective Lennon, gave  rise to a  reasonable suspicion  that            defendant  was engaged  in drug  trafficking.   Consequently,            Detective  Lennon was  justified  in  stopping defendant  and            briefly questioning him.                      We agree with the district court  that the stop was            a  Terry investigative  stop.   The fact  that, in  the brief               _____            interlude between the stop and the alleged consent to search,            Officer Lennon did not return to defendant what turned out to            have been keys  seized from defendant's closed  fist does not            constitute a de facto arrest requiring Miranda warnings.  The                         __ _____                  _______            situation was less coercive than that facing the defendant in            United States v. Quinn,  815 F.2d 153 (1st Cir.  1987), where            _____________    _____            this court concluded defendant  was not in custody and  that,            hence, Miranda warnings were not required.                   _______                      Whether   defendant  understood   Officer  Lennon's            request to search defendant's  apartment presented a  classic            credibility  issue,  and  we  see  no  basis  to  disturb the            district court's resolution.                      On  the record  before it,  the district  court was            justified in concluding that defendant understood the request            to search, that defendant consented to the  request, and that            the surrounding circumstances were  not coercive.  We do  not            find  United States  v. Gallego-Zapata,  630 F. Supp.  665 (D.                  _____________     ______________            Mass. 1986),  persuasive  or  controlling  on  the  facts  as            permissibly found by  the district court.   Moreover,  unlike            the   situation  in   Gallego-Zapata,  where   defendant  was                                  ______________            unlawfully detained at  the time  he assented  to the  search            request, the consent in the present case was given during the            course of a lawful Terry stop.                               _____                      Affirmed.                      ________                                         -3-