Sandoval-Gonzalez

MEMORANDUM **

1. There was no Terry stop when the investigating officer initially approached Sandoval-Gonzalez. Sandoval-Gonzalez’s car was broken down in a public place, and the officer stopped to provide assistance. See Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434 , 111 S.Ct. 2382 , 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) (noting that “a seizure does not occur simply because a police officer approaches an individual and asks a few questions”). By the time Sandoval-Gonzalez was detained and frisked, the officers had “a particularized and objective basis for suspecting criminal activity.” See United States v. Colin, 314 F.3d 439, 442 (9th Cir.2002) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). Specifically, Sandoval-Gonzalez could not produce any identification when asked to do so by the police; he identified himself to the police using different names; he informed the police that he was subject to probation or parole conditions; and he was discovered in a high crime area at three o’clock in the morning.

2. On appeal, Sandoval-Gonzalez asserts that the police officers exceeded the scope of the Terry stop when they forced him to remove his clothing so that they could examine his tattoos.…