CA5: No RS for def’s stop on totality <50 miles from border

There was no reasonable suspicion on the totality for defendant’s stop less than 50 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas. Officer’s experience was too limited to provide much of anything. United States v. Freeman, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 2622 (5th Cir. Jan. 25, 2019):

7. Examining the Factors as a “Laminated Total”

At this point, we are left with the following facts to be viewed from Agent Perez’s limited experience in detecting illegal activity: Freeman’s truck, a type commonly found in the area, was seen less than 50 miles from the border, it turned right onto a road known for smuggling, and his truck was registered to an individual. We conclude that these facts, without more, are not enough to support reasonable suspicion, especially when viewed through the eyes of an agent with minimal experience detecting illegal activity. Courts that have found reasonable suspicion, even in cases in close proximity to the border, have generally required more. This case is more closely analogous to Rangel-Portillo, where the court found no reasonable suspicion. Rangel-Portillo, 586 F.3d at 380-81. There, 500 yards from the border in an area known for smuggling, the driver of a Ford Explorer pulled out of a Wal-Mart parking lot, made eye contact with the Border Patrol agent, and his passengers looked straight forward and did not make eye contact with the agent. Id. If the facts of this case constituted reasonable suspicion, virtually anyone who drove a car registered to an individual and turned right onto FM 2050, a public road, would be subject to being stopped by Border Patrol agents. As the district court pointed out, had Agent Perez waited a little longer, he may have been able to develop reasonable suspicion; he did not. “The district court’s ruling should be upheld ‘if there is any reasonable view of the evidence to support it,'” Ortiz, 781 F.3d at 226 (quoting Scroggins, 190 F.3d at 671). There are ample grounds to support the district court’s determination that reasonable suspicion was lacking.

This entry was posted in Border search, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.