Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02131/USCOURTS-ca10-92-02131-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rodolfo Buenrostro-Lopez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

FIL1~D 

United State• ~rt of Appeal, 'fenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

RODOLFO BUENROSTRO-LOPEZ, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

TENTH CIRCUIT MAY 21 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-2131 

(D.C. No. 91-533-JP) 

(D.N.M.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before TACHA, BALDOCK, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Defendant-Appellant Rodolfo Buenrostro-Lopez pleaded guilty 

to one count of possession with intent to distribute less than 50 

kilograms of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) and 

(b) (1) (D). Mr. Buenrostro-Lopez's plea was entered conditionally, 

reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress 

evidence seized during a search of his car. We exercise 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 92-2131 Document: 010110115164 Date Filed: 05/21/1993 Page: 1 
On October 19, 1991, United States Border Patrol Agents 

Stuart Woodside and Ron Miller were on roving patrol near Hatch, 

New Mexico. The agents drove to Highway 185 in response to a 

report of suspicious activity by a lone male in a blue 1980 Buick 

and persons in a red station wagon. The agents spotted the 

vehicles traveling north in tandem. Based on Agent Woodside's 

experience with drug and alien smuggling techniques, he and Agent 

Miller elected to follow the two cars. As they followed, they 

noticed that the red station wagon was driving erratically, weaved 

onto the right shoulder of the road, and at one point, in the town 

of Hatch, nearly struck another vehicle head on. At that point, 

the red station wagon pulled over to the side of the road while 

the blue Buick continued on Highway 185. The agents testified 

that they did not make any type of signal to affect a stop. 

The agents then stopped their car behind the station wagon 

and its driver, Mr. Buenrostro-Lopez, exited the car and 

approached the agents. Buenrostro-Lopez asked, "How are you?" and 

Agent Woodsi de answered, "Fine." Agent Woodside then asked if all 

of the occupants of the car had immigration documents. 

Buenrostro-Lopez said yes and provided Agent Woodside with the 

appropriate documents. Agent Woodside then requested BuenrostroLopez's consent to search the car and its contents. He replied, 

"Yes, everything you like." Agent Woodside's search disclosed 

packages wrapped in grey duct tape; a subsequent search at the 

United St ates Border Patrol checkpoint on Interstate 25 revealed 

eighteen packages of marijuana weighing ninety-seven pounds. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-2131 Document: 010110115164 Date Filed: 05/21/1993 Page: 2 
On appeal, Buenrostro-Lopez challenges the denial of his 

motion to suppress the marijuana as the result of an illegal 

search and seizure. He contends that (1) the stop of his vehicle 

was an illegal seizure because the agents lacked reasonable 

suspicion that criminal activity was afoot, and (2) the search of 

his car was not voluntary. 

"We are not empowered to substitute our judgment for findings 

of the district court unless clearly erroneous." United States v. 

Werking, 915 F.2d 1404, 1406 (10th Cir. 1990). The ultimate 

determination of the legality of the search or seizure, however, 

is a question of law which we review de novo. See United States 

v. Morgan, 936 F.2d 1561, 1565-66 (10th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 

U.S. , 112 s. Ct. 1190 (1992). 

The district court stated that "[b]ased on the testimony 

given, it will be my findings that the Defendant voluntarily 

stopped his vehicle after almost being involved in an accident 

without being required to stop or being signaled to stop by the 

law enforcement authorities." Although the appellant presented 

evidence to the contrary, we do not find the district court's 

conclusion to be clearly erroneous. Moreover, the fact that the 

agents had been following the station wagon or that they turned on 

their emergency lights after stopping does not preclude a finding 

that this was a consensual encounter between a police officer and 

a private citizen. See United States v. Langston, 970 F.2d 692, 

697 n.3 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 439, and cert. 

denied, 113 S. Ct. 479, and cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 495 (1992), 

-3-

Appellate Case: 92-2131 Document: 010110115164 Date Filed: 05/21/1993 Page: 3 
and cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 1872 (1993) .

1 The district court 

also concluded that Buenrostro-Lopez consented to the search of 

the car. Again, the record does not persuade us that this factual 

determination is clearly erroneous. 

Because the appellant voluntarily consented to a search of 

his vehicle during a consensual encounter, we AFFIRM the district 

court's denial of the motion to suppress. The mandate shall issue 

forthwith. 

T 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

1 Although appellant does not raise the issue, we note that 

Agent Woodside's brief questioning of Buenrostro-Lopez regarding 

the occupants of the vehicle, which lasted less than one minute 

and involved no overbearing show of authority, also did not alter 

the consensual nature of the encounter. See Werking, 915 F.2d at 

1408-09. 

-4-

Appellate Case: 92-2131 Document: 010110115164 Date Filed: 05/21/1993 Page: 4