United States v. Ruben Ramirez-Ventura
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Defendant Ruben Ramirez-Ventura appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, challenging the district court’s denial of his suppression motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
We review de novo the denial of a motion to suppress, United States v. Jones, 286 F.3d 1146, 1150 (9th Cir.2002), and review a district court’s factual findings for clear error. United States v. Berber-Ti-noco, 510 F.3d 1083, 1087 (9th Cir.2007). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. See United States v. Miller, 822 F.2d 828, 833 (9th Cir.1987).
All parties agree that, because Ramirez was speeding, the troopers had an independent valid basis to conduct a pretextual traffic stop, see Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 812-13 , 116 S.Ct. 1769 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996), and that the troopers could ask questions unrelated to the purpose of the traffic stop, so long as the questioning did “not prolong an initially lawful stop.” United States v. Turvin, 517 F.3d 1097, 1100 (9th Cir.2008) (internal quotations omitted). Furthermore, the troopers could prolong the traffic stop if they had reasonable suspicion to justify their…