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

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
United States v. Wallace



     17-0472
     United States v. Wallace

1                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
2                                   FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
 3
 4                                             August Term, 2018
 5
 6                 (Argued: October 18, 2018                    Decided: September 3, 2019)
 7
 8                                             Docket No. 17‐0472
 9
10
11                          _____________________________________
12
13                                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
14
15                                                    Appellee,
16
17                                                         v.
18
19                                            TIMMY WALLACE,
20
21                                             Defendant‐Appellant.
22                          _____________________________________
23
24   Before:
25
26           WINTER, POOLER, Circuit Judges, and ABRAMS, District Judge.
27
28          Defendant‐Appellant Timmy Wallace appeals from a judgment of conviction
29   entered on February 13, 2017 in the United States District Court for the Southern
30   District of New York (Katherine B. Forrest, J.). Wallace was convicted after a two‐day
31   jury trial of one count of possessing a firearm and ammunition after having been
32   convicted of three serious drug offenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1),
33   924(e)(1), and 2. His principal argument on appeal is that the District Court erred in
34   denying his motion to suppress the firearm, because it was discovered as the result of
35   an unconstitutionally prolonged traffic stop. Wallace also challenges several of the
36   District Court’s factual findings and argues that he was improperly sentenced
37   pursuant to the enhanced sentencing provisions of the Armed Career Criminal Act
38   (“ACCA”). We affirm both the District Court’s denial of the motion to suppress and
39   Wallace’s sentence under ACCA.

     
      Judge Ronnie Abrams, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by
     designation.
 1         Judge Pooler dissents in a separate opinion.
 2
 3         AFFIRMED.
 4
 5                                            SAGAR K. RAVI (HAGAN SCOTTEN, on the
 6                                            brief) for Geoffrey S. Berman, UNITED STATES
 7                                            ATTORNEY FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
 8                                            NEW YORK, New York, N.Y.
 9
10                                            JONATHAN I. EDELSTEIN, EDELSTEIN &
11                                            GROSSMAN, New York, N.Y., for Timmy
12                                            Wallace.
13
14   RONNIE ABRAMS, District Judge:

15         Defendant‐Appellant Timmy Wallace appeals from a judgment of conviction

16   entered on February 13, 2017, in the United States District Court for the Southern

17   District of New York (Katherine B. Forrest, J.). Wallace was convicted after a two‐day

18   jury trial of one count of possessing a firearm and ammunition after having been

19   convicted of three serious drug offenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1),

20   924(e)(1), and 2. The District Court determined that Wallace was subject to the

21   enhanced sentencing provisions of the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18

22   U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), and sentenced him principally to 15 years of imprisonment to be

23   followed by one year of supervised release. On appeal, Wallace argues that the

24   District Court erred in denying his motion to suppress the firearm and improperly

25   sentenced him under ACCA. We reject both arguments and affirm the judgment of

26   conviction.




                                               2
 1                                               BACKGROUND

 2       I.       Factual Background1

 3            On the evening of May 25, 2015, Officers Harris Haskovic, Michael Monahan,

 

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 Back to top