The district court’s findings of consent were supported by the evidence. Defendant provided a claimed expert witness that testified that the signature on the consent form appeared to be forged. The government’s cross examination attacked the witness’s methodology and qualifications, and the district court’s rejection of the opinion was within its discretion. Otherwise, the district court found the consent voluntary based on defendant’s recorded admissions at the scene and in a jail call. United States v. Lebeau, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 15021 (8th Cir. Aug. 14, 2017).
Defendant’s stop was justified by speeding, but also by detailed information from a CI that defendant would come by at that time carrying drugs. United States v. Harry, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125061 (N.D. Iowa Aug. 8, 2017).*