United States v. Seneca Sandridge

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that sentencing court erred in treating cash found in defendant’s car solely as cocaine when evidence showed he possessed both cocaine and marijuana
• holding that information about the status of a driver's license that was three weeks old was sufficiently current to provide reasonable suspicion regarding driving with a suspended license
• concluding there was reasonable suspicion for a stop when license plate check three weeks prior had indicated the driver was driving without a valid license
• noting that “there [were] no facts in the record suggesting that [the detaining officer] should have assumed that [the defendant’s] ongoing offense had ceased between March 5 and March 27, 2002” (emphasis added)
• reversing district court’s calculation where “no evidence was presented to show that the cash was related to the sale of cocaine base, as opposed to marijuana, the other drug found in Sandridge’s car”
• upholding stop where officer had “reasonable suspicion” that driver’s license had been suspended

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).