United States v. Salvador Valencia

Good Law
584 F. App'x 488
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 11, 201413-30195, 13-30197California298 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Salvador Pulido Valencia and Victor Hugo Santa Cruz Barriga appeal the district court’s denial of their motions to suppress. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. We conclude that reasonable suspicion supported the stop of the truck. See United States v. Palos-Marquez, 591 F.3d 1272, 1274-75 (9th Cir.2010). The investigating officers reasonably suspected that the truck’s occupants were acting with a methamphetamine supplier and were on their way to meet with the cooperating methamphetamine purchaser to complete a methamphetamine sale.

2. The stop was also reasonable in its duration. Once the cooperating source identified the driver and passenger, the officers had probable cause to search the truck and therefore to detain the driver and passenger until the search warrant arrived. See Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 50-52 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970) (holding that seizing and holding a car on probable cause until a search warrant is obtained is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment).

3.Even assuming that Officer Lee deliberately or recklessly did not tell Agent Leahy about the negative drug dog sniffs, the omitted drug dog sniffs…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.