SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(US)(ca6) 166

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
United States – Appellant
Versus
Edwin Santiago – Respondent



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Plaintiff-Appellee, │ > No. 24-5762 │ v. │ │ EDWIN J. SANTIAGO, │ Defendant-Appellant. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville. No. 3:22-cr-00293-1—Eli J. Richardson, District Judge.

Decided and Filed: June 6, 2025

Before: GRIFFIN, LARSEN, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges. _________________

COUNSEL ON BRIEF: Manuel B. Russ, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Brooke C. Farzad, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee. _________________

OPINION _________________

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. A jury convicted Edwin Santiago of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court sentenced him to a within-Guidelines sentence of 56 months’ imprisonment. Santiago challenges his conviction and sentence. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM. No. 24-5762 United States v. Santiago Page 2

I.

On September 21, 2021, Detectives Dustin Tidwell and Justin Miller of the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department went in plain clothes to Auto Market, a used car dealership, to serve a subpoena. While they were standing outside the dealership, a car emitting “the obvious odor of marijuana” pulled into the parking lot. R. 172, Trial Tr., PageID 950. The car passed within fifteen to twenty feet of the detectives and parked four or five spaces away from them. When the driver opened his car door to exit, the smell of marijuana grew stronger. No one else was in the car. The officers later identified the driver as Edwin Santiago.

As Santiago entered the Auto Market, the detectives saw a pistol on his waistband. Though open carry is legal in Tennessee, possessing a firearm while under the influence of marijuana is not. The detectives suspected Santiago of possessing the firearm while under the influence and decided to detain him once he exited the store. They put on police vests and turned on their body cameras in preparation for the encounter.

The bodycam footage reveals the following: After Santiago left the store, the detectives approached him, and Miller instructed him to keep his hands up. Miller then began to handcuff Santiago, while Santiago repeatedly asked, “What’s going on?” R. 26-1, Detective Tidwell’s Bodycam Footage, 00:30–00:50. Tidwell responded, “It reeks of weed, you just pulled up here, okay? It reeks of weed. . . . [Y]ou’ve got a gun on your hip, man.” Id. at 00:43–00:50. Miller, meanwhile, pulled the pistol out of Santiago’s waistband. At this point, Santiago denied ownership of the pistol and shifted his body slightly; Miller grabbed his arm and yelled, “Stop!” Id. at 00:48–00:51. The officers then handcuffed Santiago.

Trial testimony revealed that, after handcuffing Santiago, Miller patted him down, took Santiago’s wallet out of his pocket, and retrieved Santiago’s ID. A background check disclosed that Santiago was a felon. So Miller formally placed him under arrest.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top