In USA v. Dunston (Case No. 3:24-cr-00004-JM), federal authorities charged Courtney Burt Lockett Dunston, also known as Melech Bey, after a traffic stop in Randolph County, Arkansas, led to the discovery of firearms and drugs.
On January 21, 2023, at 8:47 AM, a state trooper stopped a white Chevrolet Impala on U.S. Highway 67 for speeding (78 mph in a 55 mph zone). When asked for his driver’s license, Dunston presented a sovereign citizen identification card, asserting that he was not subject to standard licensing requirements. The officer rejected the document and asked for a valid ID. Dunston eventually provided a Texas ID under his legal name, revealing that his driver’s license was suspended and that he had an active felony warrant in Texas.
Upon searching the vehicle, law enforcement found a loaded Glock 22 .40 caliber pistol inside a locked safe in the trunk. Alongside the firearm was a high-capacity drum magazine, digital scales, and multiple plastic bags containing methamphetamine, cocaine, and ecstasy pills. Officers also discovered $595 in cash, two cell phones, and drug paraphernalia, including a razor blade covered in residue. The safe’s key was later found in Dunston’s pocket. As a convicted felon, Dunston was prohibited from possessing firearms, leading to additional federal charges.
Dunston was arrested on-site and booked into the Randolph County Jail. The Randolph County Sheriff’s Department took custody of the seized contraband and cash. He now faces multiple felony charges, including Felon in Possession of a Firearm, Possession of Controlled Substances with Intent to Distribute, and Driving on a Suspended License. Field tests confirmed that the seized narcotics tested positive for methamphetamine, cocaine, and ecstasy, solidifying the government’s case against him.
At this point in the case, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Arkansas has filed a response opposing Courtney Burt Lockett Dunston’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop. The government argues that the search was lawful, the evidence was legally seized, and suppression is unwarranted. Case conclusion to be determined.