United States v. Felix Garcia-Godoy

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 09 2012 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 11-50204 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 2:10-cr-01110-SJO-1 v. MEMORANDUM * FELIX GARCIA-GODOY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California S. James Otero, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 7, 2012 ** Pasadena, California Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, O’SCANNLAIN and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. Felix Garcia-Godoy appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence found during an inventory search of his vehicle. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Contrary to Garcia-Godoy’s assertion, the inventory search in this case was not “for the sole purpose of investigation.” Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367, 372 (1987); United States v. Bowhay, 992 F.2d 229, 231 (9th Cir. 1993). Nor was the district court’s finding that the searching officers followed “standardized procedures” clearly erroneous. See United States v. Ruckes, 586 F.3d 713, 716 (9th Cir. 2009); see also United States v. Mancera-Londono, 912 F.2d 373, 375 (9th Cir. 1990). It is of no moment that the search was never completed. United States v. Scott, 665 F.2d 874, 876 (9th Cir. 1981). AFFIRMED. 2