United States v. Lindsey
Appeal Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Case No. 02-31166

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.
Request Update Request UpdateSpaceE-Mail Alert Get E-Mail Alerts

  Text Tab Overlap Citations (2) Tab Overlap Cited By (3) Right End
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 28, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 02-31166
Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GARY DAVID LINDSEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
[End Page ]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 00-CR-50085-4
[End Page ] Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:*

Gary David Lindsey appeals his conditional guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of d-methamphetamine. He argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress his confession.

At the hearing on the motion to suppress, the district court, after hearing testimony, accepted the law enforcement agent's version of events over that of Lindsey and his wife, finding that no coercion took place and that Lindsey's confession was voluntary.

*

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
No. 02-31166
[End Page 2] We will not disturb the district court's findings absent clear error. See United States v. Restrepo, 994 F.2d 173, 183 (5th Cir. 1993). If a finding is based on oral testimony at a suppression hearing, the "clearly erroneous standard is particularly strong since the judge had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses." See United States v. Shabazz, 993 F.2d 431, 438 (5th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err in determining that the confession was voluntarily given. See id.

AFFIRMED.

Statistics

This case has been viewed 34 times.

No comments have been added yet. Sign in to post a comment.
Space
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
 
PlainSite
Sign Up
Need Password Help?