Castro-Valenzuela

MEMORANDUM **

Jorge Castro-Valenzuela (Castro) appeals from his conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841 for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. Castro argues that the district court should have suppressed the marijuana that Border Patrol agents found in his truck because the agents did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s denial of a motion to suppress. 1 Whether particular facts constitute reasonable suspicion is a mixed question of law and fact that we also review de novo. 2 However, we review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error.

In United States v. Arvizu 4 the Supreme Court emphasized that a court reviewing a reasonable suspicion question “must look at the totality of the circumstances of each case to see whether the detaining officer has a particularized and objective basis for suspecting legal wrongdoing.” 5 Under this approach, courts should not evaluate reasonable suspicion factors “in isolation from each other.... Although each of the series of acts [may be] ‘perhaps innocent in itself,’ ... taken together, they [may] ‘warrant[ ]…