United States v. Vandergriff ( 2000 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-50593
Summary Calendar
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DUDLEY EDWARD VANDERGRIFF,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas
USDC No. P-97-CR-66-ALL
_________________________________________________________________
June 7, 2000
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Dudley Edward Vandergriff appeals from his conditional nolo
contendere plea conviction and resultant sentence for possession of
a firearm by a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). He argues
that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress and
by refusing to grant him a three-level reduction in his offense
level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 for his acceptance of
responsibility. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
error. Based upon the facts known to authorities, probable cause
existed for the arrest of the occupants of the Oldsmobile that was
traveling with the Suburban. Thus, the district court did not err
by denying Vandergriff’s motion to suppress. See United States v.
Tellez, 11 F.3d 530, 532 (5th Cir. 1993). Further, based upon
Vandergriff’s continued denial of certain facts and elements of the
offense, the district court did not clearly err by denying his
request for a reduction in his offense level for acceptance of
responsibility. See United States v. Harlan, 35 F.3d 176, 181 (5th
Cir. 1994). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
A F F I R M E D.
2