Case ID: f-appx_86/html/0767-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio JAUREGUI-ESPARZA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-50963.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 11, 2004.
    Diane D. Kirstein, Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant US Attorney, US Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Rogelio F. Munoz, Uvalde, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before DUHÉ, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Antonio Jauregui-Esparza (“Jauregui”) appeals from his conviction by guilty plea of possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Jauregui retained his right to appeal from the denial of his motion to suppress evidence, and he contends that Border Patrol agents lacked reasonable suspicion to stop his pickup after it was observed on Ranch Road 2523 near Del Rio, Texas.

The Border Patrol agents in Jauregui’s case had reasonable suspicion to stop the pickup. Jauregui was traveling in an area close to the border, on a road frequently used to avoid a Border Patrol checkpoint. Agent Rene Carrasco was familiar with RR 2523, having patrolled the road for eight years. Jauregui’s vehicle was very clean, which in Agent Carrasco’s experience was unusual for the area. Jauregui did not respond to Agent Carrasco’s wave, and he accelerated and drove away very fast after his initial encounter with Agent Carrasco. Jauregui did not stop until agents activated their lights. By the time Jauregui was stopped, agents could have reasonably suspected that Jauregui was involved in criminal activity. See United States v. Inocencio, 40 F.3d 716, 722 (5th Cir.1994). The district court did not err by denying the motion to suppress.

AFFIRMED. 
      
      . Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.