United States v. Duran De Santiago

Good Law
348 F. App'x 262
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 9, 2009No. 08-30142California409 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Jose Bernardo Duran De Santiago appeals from the District Court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence following *263 an investigatory stop, detention at a gasoline station, and search of his pickup vehicle. We review the denial of a motion to suppress de novo; however, the factual findings made by the trial court (in the denial of the motion) are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Howard, 447 F.3d 1257 , 1262 n. 4 (9th Cir.2006) (citing United States v. Gorman, 314 F.3d 1105, 1110 (9th Cir.2002)).

“[RJeasonable suspicion exists when an officer is aware of specific, articulable facts which, when considered with objective and reasonable inferences, form a basis for particularized suspicion.” United States v. Montero-Camargo, 208 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir.2000) (emphasis in original). Under the collective knowledge doctrine, the court may look at “the collective knowledge of all of the officers involved in the criminal investigation [even though] all of the information known to the law enforcement officers involved in the investigation is not communicated to the officer who actually undertakes the challenged action.” United States v. Ramirez, 473 F.3d…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.