described the something as being heavily laden i mean if you if to him heavily laden means you know a case of beer or a couple bags of groceries based upon you know that's where his observations have led to in addition to th be well breaking those down for example one o'clock in the morning when you compare that with r v s i mean in our history the agent said this happened at this particular time that was three o'clock in the afternoon or something like that that agent said that from his experience you know these two that that that coincided directly with the time when border patrol shift changed occur in this remote area and that from that agency experience an r v so that smugglers he knew the smugglers tried to coincide their trips with one shift change skirt this is going to testify did not testify on the record that there was anything inherently suspicious about one in the morning in other words he can't testify that smugglers are more likely to smuggle one in the morning as opposed to ten o'clock at night or six in the evening i mean you know border patrol does not have authority to to just say well this looked on usual to me they have to say it looked on the usual and they have to connect the dots to say that it's unusual and it's probative from my experience of what we have authority or jurisdiction to do its duty to testify as to any border patrol experience beyond the zone that is he factored in any training or any factors and the week before some weeks before they had pulled a minivan same type of cars there the suv that it hit those sensors and they took off a lot of drugs so i don't think parv you sumit and my reading of the supreme court's opinion was border for the first time not coming from the border not anywhere near the border not off of a dirt road that comes anywhere on the border not having hit a sensor even being dusty or dirty to indicate that it had been off road near the border and that road is in the record trials he saw people that did not look to him like they were from that area and that's an indian reservation ok what do you make of that i'm sorry what do you make of that  features a dark skinned broad nose broad foreheads things like that his overgeneralizations and what people look like who do come from the reservation as compared to my client you know or you know he was a are re morning your honor may it please the court elizabeth their injured assistant u s attorney on behalf of united states district court here properly found the agent group need a good reasonable suspicion determination in this case although the fence counsel is knowledge that it's it's all there to tell you factors he still tries to parcel out those different factors instead of looking to the overall circumstances there were circumstances to support reasonable suspicion in this case first the characteristics of the area cannot be overlooked it was one am in the morning much like diaz wires that this court decided on a remote two lane highway leading from the border as judge kozinski noted a dead ended at the border there were roots and dirt trails breakthroughs in the international fence line th pit the agent testified that drug smugglers and human traffickers used to enter as well as mountain ranges on both sides of the roads with trails that the aliens used to go into three native american villages along that road that served as spots where the illegal aliens would wait for rides i when i do not pass any cities area attractions or national parks there is no evidence in the record that there is any can't be in fact to the contrary it's said that there isn't anything to do down there there was a most definitely not the thing that in this case it was this particular intersection at one am in the morning combined with the aspect of the defendant's vehicle and the appearance of the driver was that it wasn't just that the car was traveling on that road it was more that it was very unusual to it's especially in his training we can't overlook training that that meant that contraband could be in the trunk and that's on you are twenty one and twenty two also there was no license plate so he couldn't figure out usually what you do is run the license  you make of the argument though that in his personal experience each time he jumped on that heavily laden trained factor it all turned out to be in months including a sixteen week border patrol academy and five months of right along with another officer that the knowledge has been imparted to him that that could in the could be a factor that indicated that illegal contraband was in the trunk so he was trained in theory and in practice proves nothing more than there was there in groceries in the trunk that there was always something in the trunk dogs what does that mean there isn't enough in the record to really support with what that means but basically i'm assuming that the dogs indicated on the vehicle so i think they talked to americans for  that there wasn't any license plate here and found the appearance of the driver did contribute to agent groups reasonable suspicion he had been working there in this very remote location for eight months day in and day out as i already mentioned record that he would impose on hansen and although he didn't make a specific finding an s c r twenty four twenty six fifty five and sixty eight he all made comments suggesting that he believed that dangerousness may have been a factor despite your very so and we're not even it's not an animal emmeline issue where courts consider remaining to see whether district court judge would do had he known that the sentencing guidelines were advisory just roll clearly understood that the guidelines well the issue is whether you can reasonable suspicion and one more thing we just don't address an officer down is for instance the absent presence or absence of a license plate i mean there's nothing that this this agent did not testify from his experience it's it's a sort of negative