Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-04066/USCOURTS-ca8-04-04066-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Oscar Berrera Sanchez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendation of the

Honorable Sarah W. Hays, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District

of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-4066

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Western

* District of Missouri.

Oscar Berrera Sanchez, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 11, 2005

Filed: August 10, 2005 

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BEAM, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

BEAM, Circuit Judge.

Oscar Berrera Sanchez appeals the district court's1

 denial of his motion to

suppress the 9mm pistol that formed the basis of his prosecution. Sanchez entered

a conditional plea of guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm,

in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2), and was sentenced to a term of

fifty-five months' imprisonment. We affirm.

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-2-

I. BACKGROUND

On July 5, 2003, at approximately 11:30 a.m., Trooper Seaton of the Missouri

State Highway Patrol stopped a car with a Montana license plate for following too

closely. Tara Hencz was driving and Sanchez was a front-seat passenger. After

explaining the reason for the stop Seaton requested Hencz's license, which she

provided, her hands visibly shaking. The two went back to Seaton's patrol car. 

Once in the patrol car, Seaton asked Hencz where she was going and with

whom she was traveling. Hencz replied that she was traveling to St. Louis to visit her

aunt, Kathy, and that her passenger's name was Anthony. She could not provide

Anthony's last name, however, nor could she provide a location or address where she

was to meet her aunt. Seaton noticed that Hencz appeared very nervous and sat

rigidly in his car. Hencz's voice was shaky and her pulse was noticeably heavy while

answering his questions. When asked how long she had known her passenger, Hencz

responded it had been about one year, and again denied knowing his last name.

Hencz remained very nervous during the entire exchange and her pulse was visibly

pounding in her lower abdomen. 

Based upon these responses, Seaton became suspicious and contacted Corporal

Greg Swartz, a canine handler with the Missouri State Highway Patrol for backup.

Swartz arrived with his dog, Yote, within two to three minutes. 

Seaton also approached Sanchez, the passenger, who initially produced a false

Arizona identification card (ID) bearing the name "Antonio Lopez." Seaton and

Swartz became suspicious of Sanchez's ID given the characteristics of the card.

When questioned about the ID, Sanchez responded that he had been using it for about

two years, but he avoided the direct question regarding whether it was fake. Seaton

ran several computer checks on the ID to determine if it was fake, all of which came

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-3-

up with nothing regarding the name on the ID. Seaton asked Sanchez where the two

were going and Sanchez initially responded that they were visiting a friend, but then

changed his response to Hencz's aunt. Sanchez claimed to have known Hencz for a

couple of months. Swartz also asked Sanchez questions about Hencz and how long

Sanchez had lived in Montana. Sanchez's responses were inconsistent with Hencz's

answers. 

Based on the computer checks that failed to confirm Sanchez's identity and the

belief that the ID was fake, the conflicting stories recounted by Hencz and Sanchez,

and the nervous demeanor of Hencz, both Seaton and Swartz suspected that Hencz

and Sanchez were involved in criminal activity. Seaton issued a warning citation to

Hencz for following too closely and told her that she was free to go. 

As Hencz was walking away, Seaton called to her and asked her if he could ask

her a few questions. Hencz acquiesced. Seaton told her that he was a bit suspicious

based on their encounter and asked Hencz if she was aware of the drug problem in the

United States. Hencz responded affirmatively. Seaton then asked Hencz if she was

aware that people transported narcotics across the country every day in vehicles.

Hencz responded that she did not know that. Again, during this entire exchange,

Hencz remained visibly shaken and had goose bumps despite the fact that it was 100

degrees that day. Seaton then asked Hencz for permission to search her car. Hencz

refused. Seaton ordered Sanchez out of the vehicle. 

Swartz led Yote around the vehicle to conduct an exterior sniff. The dog

search commenced at about 12:10 p.m. Yote alerted to the presence of narcotics in

the trunk area of the car and Seaton opened the trunk, discovering large bundles of

marijuana. Seaton and Swartz arrested Sanchez and Hencz. The entire encounter

lasted about forty-five minutes. 

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-4-

Following the arrests, the vehicle was towed and Swartz and Seaton conducted

an inventory search. They discovered three large bundles of marijuana weighing

approximately thirty pounds each, a smaller package of marijuana on the back seat,

a small amount of methamphetamine, and four rounds of 9mm ammunition. They

also found a loaded 9mm pistol underneath the passenger seat. 

After the inventory search, Seaton interviewed Henzc and she admitted that the

car was loaded with marijuana by Sanchez and some of his friends. She stated that

she was to be paid to drive the vehicle to St. Louis and that she and Sanchez had

rehearsed a story in case they were stopped by the police. She also stated that she saw

Sanchez with the gun and that it belonged to him. This firearm formed the basis for

the instant charges, as Sanchez was a multiple-count felon.

II. DISCUSSION

We review the district court's factual findings for clear error, and its conclusion

regarding the alleged Fourth Amendment violation is reviewed de novo. United

States v. Morgan, 270 F.3d 625, 630 (8th Cir. 2001). 

There are no issues on appeal about the validity of the initial stop in this case.

Sanchez argues that even if the initial traffic stop was lawful, the detention of Hencz

and Sanchez for approximately forty-five minutes was too long and constitutes a de

facto arrest because the police were not diligent in their investigation. For example,

Sanchez argues that the police failed to conduct their investigation quickly and

unintrusively because they did not conduct the dog sniff until forty minutes after the

initial stop even though the canine was immediately available. Sanchez further

argues that Seaton's further questioning of Hencz after Seaton had issued the citation

and told her she was "free to go" constituted a deceptive tactic that renders the

ensuing detention unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. He claims that the

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 4 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-5-

firearm forming the basis of the instant offense was obtained only after a staged

termination of the traffic stop. We disagree. 

Given Hencz's traffic violation, Seaton had probable cause to stop her vehicle

and conduct a reasonable investigation. United States v. Bloomfield, 40 F.3d 910,

915 (8th Cir. 1994) (en banc). "A reasonable investigation includes asking for the

driver's license, the vehicle's registration, as well as inquiring about the occupants'

destination, route, and purpose." United States v. Munroe, 143 F.3d 1113, 1116 (8th

Cir. 1998). "An officer may also question a vehicle's passengers to verify information

provided by the driver, and conflicting stories may provide justification to expand the

scope of the stop and detain the occupants." United States v. Barragan, 379 F.3d 524,

529 (8th Cir. 2004) (citations omitted). "'[A]n investigative detention must be

temporary and last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop.

Similarly, the investigative methods employed should be the least intrusive means

reasonably available to verify or dispel the officer's suspicion in a short period of

time.'" Bloomfield, 40 F.3d at 916 (quoting United States v. Willis, 967 F.2d 1220,

1224 (8th Cir. 1992)). An investigative detention may turn into an arrest if it "lasts

for an unreasonably long time or if officers use unreasonable force." United States

v. Navarrete-Barron, 192 F.3d 786, 790 (8th Cir. 1999). 

There was no de facto arrest here. The length of the detention was reasonable

and the officers acted diligently to minimize the detention period. The majority of the

nearly forty-five minute encounter was spent completing the traffic stop, including

time spent by Seaton to confirm the identity of Sanchez based upon the highly suspect

ID that he had provided. See Barragan, 379 F.3d at 528-29 (recognizing that an

officer may detain the motorists while completing a number of routine but somewhat

time-consuming tasks such as computerized checks of the registration and license).

Any delay caused by the multiple computer checks of the ID was necessary to

Seaton's legitimate investigation, as Sanchez had been intentionally evasive about his

identity by providing the fake ID. And, even though Yote was at the scene from the

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 5 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-6-

near beginning of the stop, the officers were busy completing other portions of the

stop before turning to the dog sniff. And at that point, it only took a short time to

walk the dog around the vehicle. Yote quickly alerted to the presence of drugs. A

total duration of approximately forty-five minutes is certainly not unreasonable given

these circumstances, and these officers employed the least intrusive means of

detention and investigation. See e.g., United States v. Maltais, 403 F.3d 550, 557

(8th Cir. 2005) (finding a detention of nearly three hours reasonable under the

circumstances); Bloomfield, 40 F.3d at 917 (holding a one-hour detention

reasonable). 

The officers' detention of Sanchez and Hencz after Hencz had declined consent

to search the vehicle and during the canine sniff also did not violate Sanchez's Fourth

Amendment rights. "If, during a traffic stop, an officer develops a reasonable,

articulable suspicion that a vehicle is carrying contraband, he has 'justification for a

greater intrusion unrelated to the traffic offense.'" Bloomfield, 40 F.3d at 918

(quoting United States v. Cummins, 920 F.2d 498, 502 (8th Cir. 1990)). Whether an

officer has reasonable suspicion to expand the scope of a stop is determined by

looking at "the totality of the circumstances, in light of the officer's experience."

United States v. Carrate, 122 F.3d 666, 668 (8th Cir. 1997) (citations and quotation

marks omitted). 

At the time of this stop, Seaton had been a trooper with the Missouri State

Highway Patrol for nearly nine years and was a drug recognition expert with

additional training in drug interdiction. During the course of the stop, he observed

Hencz's increasingly nervous behavior and questioned the fact that she did not know

where she was to meet her aunt in St. Louis. He was also initially suspicious of

Sanchez based on the ID Sanchez provided. Seaton's suspicions were confirmed by

Swartz when Swartz arrived at the scene. The failed attempts to run a check on the

questionable ID only exacerbated these suspicions, along with the conflicting stories

provided by Hencz and Sanchez, and the fact that Hencz did not know Sanchez's last

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 6 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623
-7-

name even though she claimed to have known him for almost a year. All of these acts

and occurrences have been held to be indicators of criminal activity in other cases.

E.g., Morgan, 270 F.3d at 631 (citing a driver's extreme nervousness and

contradictory statements as indicators of criminal activity). Thus, whether or not

Hencz agreed to visit further with Seaton after he issued the citation is immaterial.

He had reasonable suspicion to expand the stop at that time. Examined in light of his

training and experience, Seaton's observations constitute a reasonable, articulable

suspicion that criminal activity was afoot, justifying the use of the dog and the seizure

and detention of Sanchez and the vehicle that followed. 

Although Sanchez does not challenge the search of the vehicle after Yote

"alerted," we complete our analysis so as to reach the discovery of the firearm at issue

in this case. A dog sniff is not a search within the meaning of the Fourth

Amendment, and thus requires no probable cause to be performed. Illinois v.

Caballes, 125 S. Ct. 834 (2005) "A dog's identification of drugs in luggage or in a

car provides probable cause that drugs are present." Bloomfield, 40 F.3d at 919.

Once probable cause is established, the vehicle can be searched without a warrant

under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. Id. This exception

likewise applies to the inventory search conducted after the vehicle was towed. The

officers did not need to obtain a warrant to make a valid search. Groh v. Ramirez,

540 U.S. 551, 572 (2004) (Thomas, J., dissenting). The gun was found during the

inventory search and thus was not subject to suppression. 

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court's denial of Sanchez's

motion to suppress. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-4066 Page: 7 Date Filed: 08/10/2005 Entry ID: 1938623