Cuevas

MEMORANDUM *

Alfredo Cuevas appeals his conviction and sentence for possession with intent to distribute one kilogram of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we will not recite them in this decision.

Cuevas first argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress because he was unlawfully seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. We disagree. Whether the defendant’s contact with a law enforcement officer constitutes a seizure is reviewed de novo. United States v. Cormier, 220 F.3d 1103, 1110 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U. S. 1174 , 121 S.Ct. 1146 , 148 L.Ed.2d 1009 (2001). The factual findings are reviewed for clear error. Id.

“[Sjeizure does not occur simply because a police officer approaches an individual and asks a few questions.” Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434 , 111 S.Ct. 2382 , 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991). An officer may ask questions even when the officer has no basis for suspecting the individual. Id. If a reasonable person would have believed that he is free to leave, the encounter was consensual and will not…