Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-10766/USCOURTS-ca5-03-10766-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
David Valdez
Appellant

Document Text:

1Pursuant 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.

-1-

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 19, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________________

No. 03-10766

SUMMARY CALENDAR

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

DAVID VALDEZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

______________________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

(2:02-CR-00074-ALL)

______________________________________________________________________________

Before REYNALDO G. GARZA, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

REYNALDO G. GARZA, Circuit Judge:1

We review David Valdez’s conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to

distribute methamphetamine. Valdez argues that evidence seized during the search of his home

and statements made thereafter should be suppressed because the officers’ failure to knock and

announce their presence prior to entering his home was not justified by exigent circumstances.

 Case: 03-10766 Document: 0051592182 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2004
-2-

We hold that the district court did not err in determining that officers in this case had a

reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing would likely result in violence or the

destruction of evidence, which justified their decision based upon the following articulated facts:

(1) Valdez’s home was occupied by Delissa and Christopher Valdez, who were both on felony

probation, under federal indictment for federal drug offenses, and previously found to be in

possession of a firearm during a search of their residence three weeks prior to the execution of the

warrant at issue; (2) Delissa Valdez also had a prior arrest for possession of a firearm; (3)

surveillance of David Valdez’s home the night before the search at issue revealed behavior

indicative of drug trafficking; (4) a confidential informant indicated the man in control of the

premises was in possession of a large amount of methamphetamine; and (5) methamphetamine

users are typically more violent than users of other illegal drugs. See Richards v. Wisconsin, 520

U.S. 385, 387 (1997); United States v. Banks, 124 S.Ct. 521, 525 (2003). For the foregoing

reasons, we uphold the conviction.

 Case: 03-10766 Document: 0051592182 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2004