United States v. Mario Cesar Espinoza-Padilla

42 F.3d 1403 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Cesar ESPINOZA-PADILLA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50329. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1994. * Decided Dec. 6, 1994. 1 Before: ALARCON and HALL, Circuit Judges, and KING, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Mario Cesar Espinoza-Padilla was convicted and sentenced after entering a conditional plea of guilty for possession of forty-two kilograms of cocaine with the intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841 (a)(1). He appeals the district court's order denying his motion to suppress evidence recovered during a search of his vehicle at a United States Border Patrol permanent checkpoint in San Clemente, California. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and affirm. 4 I. DISCUSSION. 5 Espinoza-Padilla argues that the district court erred in denying his suppression motion because (1) his…