United States v. Omar Ortiz-Flores

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Omar Ortiz-Flores (“Ortiz-Flores”) appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence in connection with his conviction for possession of heroin with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . The facts are known to the parties and we do not recite them here.

A stop at a permanent immigration checkpoint, like the San Clemente checkpoint, is constitutional as long as the detention is limited to a few brief questions about immigration and the production of immigration documents. United States v. Preciado-Robles, 964 F.2d 882, 884 (9th Cir.1992) (citing United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543, 558 , 96 S.Ct. 3074 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976)). Whether or not the Border Patrol agent in this case impermissibly extended the immigration stop, the search of Ortiz-Flores’s backpack and the search of his person must be justi- fled by consent or probable cause. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. at 566-67 , 96 S.Ct. 3074 .

When the prosecution “seeks to rely upon consent to justify the lawfulness of a search, [the prosecution] has the burden of proving that…