TX1: Frequenting bar known for drug sales, going in and out repeatedly, and furtive gestures when stopped was PC

Officers had probable cause under the automobile exception to search defendant’s truck, or at least the trial court had a basis for finding it. Defendant had entered a bar known for drug sales that the police were surveilling. He’d been seen there before. This time, he left a couple of times and came back in again. Finally, he left and the surveilling officer followed, observing traffic offenses. That officer called for a marked car to make the stop. That officer also observed a traffic offense. Defendant was sitting in the truck making repeated furtive gestures. The collective knowledge doctrine would have supported the stop without the subsequent violation. There was probable cause from defendant’s actions in the car. “Given Appellant’s repeated history of going to a place known for selling narcotics, his uncommonly short time spent at a bar, and his furtive gestures when he noticed a patrol car behind him, we hold there was a substantial basis in the record to support the trial court’s ruling of probable cause.” Marcopoulos v. State, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 3911 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) April 14, 2016) (concur; dissent).* [Comment: Two problems here: The dissent makes the better case. Worse, the Court of Appeals fails to make an independent review of probable cause under Ornelas, which isn’t even cited in this case, instead crediting trial court’s finding. Lazy panel.]