Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-02-41282/USCOURTS-ca5-02-41282-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Rodriguez Barrientes
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 13, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-40568

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS RODRIGUEZ BARRIENTES,

also known as Jesus Barrientes,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-01-CR-500-1

Before JONES, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Rodriguez Barrientes appeals his guilty-plea

conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The

Government argues that Barrientes’s only issue on appeal, the

denial of his suppression motion, was waived by the entry of an

unconditional guilty plea. However, review of the transcript of

the rearraignment hearing shows that Barrientes has preserved his

right to appeal the denial of the suppression motion because there

 Case: 02-41282 Document: 0051943 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2004
2

is a clear indication of Barrientes’s intention to plead

conditionally, of his intention to appeal the denial of the motion

to suppress in particular, and the acquiescence of the Government

and the district court in the conditional plea. See United States

v. Wise, 179 F.3d 184, 187 (5th Cir. 1999).

Barrientes argues that his suppression motion should not

have been denied because the search warrant was supported only by

a “bare bones” affidavit. The averments in the affidavit were not

wholly conclusory but contained sufficiently detailed information

from which the magistrate could independently determine probable

cause. See United States v. Pofahl, 990 F.2d 1456, 1474 n.18 (5th

Cir. 1993). The officer corroborated several pieces of the

anonymous informant’s information, demonstrating the informant’s

reliability. See United States v. Jackson, 818 F.2d 345, 348 (5th

Cir. 1987). There was no requirement that all of the informant’s

tips be corroborated by subsequent police investigation in order to

be considered credible. See United States v. Blount, 123 F.3d 831,

836 (5th Cir. 1997)(en banc).

Because the affidavit in support of the search warrant

was not “bare bones,” the good-faith exception applied, and the

district court did not err in denying Barrientes’s suppression

motion. See United States v. Cisneros, 112 F.3d 1272, 1278 (5th

Cir. 1997). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 02-41282 Document: 0051943 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2004