Castro

MEMORANDUM **

Steven Castro appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress following his conviction on a conditional guilty plea to a single count of violating 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(a)(2) for being a felon in possession of a firearm. We have jurisdiction over Castro’s timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Castro argues that after United States v. Chavez-Valenzuela, 268 F.3d 719 (9th Cir.2001), nervousness is insufficient to justify his continued detention and questioning. However, the district court found that the Highway Patrol Trooper who pulled Castro over made observations of unusual behavior that went beyond ordinary nervousness: in addition to being quite nervous for a routine stop of this nature, Castro’s hands trembled, his speech was rapid, he continually watched the officer through the rear view mirror to see what Stepien was doing while Stepien was writing the ticket in his cruiser, and he turned around to watch Stepien as he walked back toward Castro’s car. Further, Castro was not the registered owner of the vehicle. He could produce no proof of insurance or registration, and did not try to open the locked glove box to…

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

THOMAS, Circuit Judge.

Although I agree with much of the majority’s analysis, I must respectfully dissent from the conclusion that, under the circumstances presented by this case, a search of a locked, inaccessible trunk of an automobile was justified under the protective sweep doctrine enunciated in Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049 , 103 S.Ct. 3469 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983).