Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 10019 Su m m ar yC al endar
UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee
v. J IM M YS T E E L E , D e fe nda nt
- Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e N ort h ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SDC N o . 4 : 0 8

- CR- 8 7

- ALL
B ef ore D AV IS, SM ITH , an d D E N N IS, C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * J i m m y S teele ap p ea l s h i s con victi on f or p oss ess i on w ith in ten t t o di st ribu t e 500 gram s or m ore of cocai n e, possessi on of a f i rearm i n f

u rt h eran ce o f adr ug t r af

f i c ki ng o f

fe ns e , a nd p o s s e s s i o n o f a fi rearm b y a c o nvic t e d f e l o n. S t eel e argu es th at th e di st ri ctcourterr ed byden yin gh is m ot i on t o sup press e v id e n c e s e iz e dfo llo w in gt h e t r a ffic s to p a n ds e a r c h o f h is v e h ic le th a t le dto h is a r r e s t. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D November

23, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 09- 10019

2 For t he f

i rst ti m e o n appeal , St ee l e a r gues t hatt he poli c e di d nothave reasona bl e suspi ci on t o m ak e t h e i n i t i al st op of h i s veh i cl e f or a t raf

f i c of fen se. H e a s s e r t s t hatthe ba s i s f o rt he t r af

f i cs t o p was no tc l e ara nd thatt he G o ve r nm e ntdi d not c i t e t o a ny pr o vi s i o n f r o m t he Te xa s Tr ans po r t at i o n Cod e t hathe a l l e ge dly vi o l at e d. B e c a u s e S te e le d idn o t c h a lle n g e th e in itia l s to p o f h is v e h ic le fo ratr a ffic
v io la tio n inth e d is tr ic t c o u r t, w e re v ie w th is is s u e fo rp la in e r r o r . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. D e Jesus- B atres , 410 F
. 3d154 , 158 ( 5th C i r. 200 5)
. To sh ow pl ai n err or, S te e le m u s t s h o w afo r fe ite de r r o rth a t is cle a ro ro b v io u s a n dth a t a ffe c ts h is
s u b s ta n tia l rig h ts . S ee P u ck ett v . Un i t ed S t ate s , 1 2 9 S
. C t. 1 4 2 3 , 1 4 2 9 (20 0 9 ). If h e m a k e s s u c h a s h o w in g , w e h a v e t h e d is c r e tio n to co r r e c t t h e e r r o rb u t o n ly i f its er i ous l y af

fec t s t he fai r nes s, i nt egr i t y, orpu b l i cr eput at i on o f j udi c i al p r o c e e d in g s . Se ei d. Theu nd i s p ut e de v i d e nc e p r e s e nt e di n t hed i s t r i c tc o ur ts ho wedt hat S t eele’ s vehi cl e ha d an expi red l i cense pl ate. Th e expi red l i cense pl ate w as a tr a ffic v io la tio n th a t ju s tifie dth e in itia l tr a ffic s to p . S eeT EX . T RANSP . C ODE § 502
. 407
. Th at O f

f i cer C aryW a lk e r, t h e of f i cer w h o st opp ed S t eel e, di d n ot recit e t h e specif

i c sect i on of t h e T exas T ran sport ati on C ode th at S t eel e vi ol ated di d no t m ak e t he s t o p i nva l i d; s o l o ng as t he r e w as a n o bj e c t iver e as o n t o m ak e th e st op , “the i n i ti a lstop pa sse s con sti tu ti on a lm u ster. ” Un i t ed S t ate s v. L opezMo r e no , 4 2 0 F .3 d4 2 0 , 4 3 2 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d idn o t c o m m it
error , pl ai n or ot h erw i se, by rul i n g t h at the i n i t i alstop of S t eel e’ s veh i cl e di d n ot violate th e F ou rth A m en d m en t. St e e l e a r gue s t hate ve n if t he i nit i al s t o p o f

hi s v e hi c l e w as j us t i f i e d, t he
s ubs e que nt s e ar c h o f hi s ve hi c l e and t he c o m pa r t m e ntund e rt he c ar pe ti n t he t r unk o f

hi s v eh i cl e v i o l at e d the Fo ur t h Am e ndm e nt . H e m ai nt ai ns t hatt he p o lic e d idn o t h a v e p r o b a b le ca u s e to b e l ie v e th a t t h e r e w a s co n tr a b a n dinh is vehi c l e b ec ause t he i nf or m a ti on pr ovi ded byt he i nf or m antdi d nothave suff i ci en ti n di ci a of

reli abili t y an d w as not suf f i ci e ntly c o rr o bo r ated by the pol i ce.N o. 09- 10019

3 H e co n te n d s th a t in s t e a d o f b a s in gh is a c tio n s u p o n s p e c ifica n da r tic u la b le fac t s , O f

f i c e rJ ak e W hi t e , t he o f f i c e rw ho i ns t r uc t e d O f f i c e rW alke rt o s t o p a nd search S t eel e’ s veh i cl e, based t h e search of h i s veh i cl e on a h u n ch a s O f f i cer W h ite s ta te do v e rt h e p o lic e ra d io
. S te e le fu r th e ra s s e r ts th a t t h e s e a r c h o f h is
ve hi c l e w as no tj us t i f i ab l e b as e d up o n t he t r af f i cst o p be c aus e t he s e ar c h o f t he t r unk of

t he ve hi c l e w as notr el at ed t o the i ss ue o f w het her t he ve hi c l e had an exp i red l i cense pl ate. H e argu es t h at pu rsuan t t o t h e Su prem e C ou rt ’ s opi n i on i n Arizo na v . G ant , 129 S. C t . 1710 ( 2009) , t he se ar c h of hi s vehi cl e w a s n ot a l egal sea rc h p u rsuan tt o an arres tbecau se he h adbeen sec u red i n O f f i cer W a lk e r ’ s v e h ic le p r io rto th e s e a r c h
.
“ The aut o m o bil e e xc e pt i o n t o the Fo ur t h Am e ndm e nt ’ s w ar r ant
r e q u ir e m e n t p e r m its a u th o r itie s to s e a r c h a v e h ic le w h e n th e y h a v e p r o b a b le
ca u se to b eli ev e itcon tain s con trab a n d
. ” Un i t ed S t ate s v. S au cedo- Mu n oz , 307 F
. 3d344 , 351 ( 5th C i r. 2 002 )
. “ T h e p robable cau se n ecess ary f or a w arran t l ess se a r c h i s t o b e d e te rm in e db yth e sa m e sta n d a rda s th a t forissu a n ce of a
w a rra n t. ” Un itedS ta tes v. B a rb in , 743 F
. 2d 256 , 259 ( 5th C i r. 198 4)
. W h et h er proba bl e cause exi st s r equ i res a “pract i cal , com m on - sense” determ i n ati on of
w h eth er th e circu m stan ces, i n cl u d i n g in form a ti on o b tain edfrom an i n form a n t, e s t ab l i s h “ a fairpr o babil i t y t hatco nt r ab andore vi de nc e o f ac r i m e w i l lb e f

o und i n a p a rti cu l a r p l a ce.” Un i t ed S t ate s v. R eyes , 792 F. 2d 536, 539 ( 5t h C i r . 1986) (in te rn a l qu o ta tion m a rk s a n dcita tion om itted ). A l t h ou gh t h e i n f

orm an ti n t h i s c ase w as a f i rst
- t i m e i n f

orm an t , she earn ed O ff i cer W h i te’ s tru st byi d en tifyin gm u l ti p l e d ru g d ea l ers th a t O ff i cer W h i te al readykn ew . I n add i t i on , t h e i n f orm an t ad m i t t ed t o pu rchasi n g cocai n e f rom St e e l e , a n a dm i s s i o n aga i ns tpena li nt e r e s t . Bot h of t he s e fac t o r s adde d t o t he in fo r m a n t’s cr e d ib ility
. Se ei d. ; Un i t ed S t ate s v. McK eeve r , 5 F
. 3 d86 3 , 86 5 ( 5 th C ir. 1 9 9 3 ). T h e in fo r m a n t p r o v id e ds u b s ta n ti a lde tail s re g a r d in gS te e le , in c lu d in gh is f i r s tna m e , t he m ak e a nd c o l o ro f hi s v e hi c l e , av ag ue phy s i c alde s c r i pt i o n, t heN o. 09- 10019

4 t yp e o f dr ug he s o l d, a nd wher e he ke ptt h e d rugs i n hi s v e hi c l e . She sub sequ en t l y arran gedt o pu rchase coc ai n e f rom Steel e, an d sh e t ol d O f f i cer W h i t e t h e l ocat i onw h ere th e t ran sact i on w as sup posedt o occ u r. Sh e i n f orm ed O f f i c e rW hi t e t hatSt e e l e w o ul d b e a t t en di ng a w ak e pr i o rt o m ak i ng t he t ran sact i on . T h e i n f orm an tl atert ol d O f f i cer W h i t e t h at Steel e ha d cal l ed h er and t ol d hert hathe w as on hi s w ay t o the l oc at i on w h ere t he t r ansac t i on w as to o c c u r . O f f i c e rW h i t e a n do t h e ro f f i c e r s i n d e p e n d e n t l yc o n f i r m e ds o m e o f

t he i nf or m at i on give n b y th e i nf or m ant . By engagi ng i n surveil l anceata f uneral ho m e a nd ac hur c h, O f f i c e rW hi t e a nd o t he ro f f i c e r s s po t t e d av e hi c l e m at c hi ng t h e descripti ongiven by the i n f orm an tt h at w as driven by on e o r m ore i n d ivid u a l s m a tch i n g th e va gu e p h ys i ca ld escr i p ti on g ive n b y th e inform a n t t o af u n era lh om e a n da ch u rch tha t ha da ctivity on go i n g th a t w a s con sist en t w i th a w ake. At appro xi m at ely t he s am e t i m e the i nf or m ant t ol d O f

f i c erW hi t e that S t eel e w as on h i s w ay, O f f i cer W h i t e observed S t eel e’ s vehi cl e l eave the chu rch p a rk i n g lot. O ff

i cer W h i te the n f

oll ow edS teele’ s ve h i cl e for sev era lm i l es to
m ak e c e r t ai n itw as t r av e l i ng i n t he dir e c t i o n o f t he l o c at i o n wher e t he tr a n s a c tio n w a s to o c c u rb e fo r e in s tr u c tin g O ffic e r W a lk e r to in itia te th e tr a ffic
s t o p. T h e detai l of t h e i n f orm ati on given by th e i n f orm an t , t h e realt i m e up da t es given b yt h e i n f

orm an t , an d the corr oborati onof t h e i n f orm ati on by O f

f i cer W h i t e w ere s u f

f i ci en tt o est abli sh probable cau se t h at S t eel e’ s veh i cl e contai n ed
c o n tr a b a n d
. S ee Un i t e dS t a t e sv . A d a ms , N o. 9 3- 829 0, 1 995 W L 581 896 at *2- *3 (5 th C ir
. S e p t. 2 2 , 1 9 9 5 ) (u n p u b lis h e d), v ac at e d o n o t he rg ro unds , 517 U
. S. 1184, 1 1 8 4 (1 9 9 6 ), rei n st ate di n pa rt , 1 9 9 6 W L 481272 at*1 n. 1 ( 5t h C i r . A ug. 12, 1 9 9 6 ) (u n p u b lis h e d); R eyes , 7 9 2 F .2 da t 5 3 9 -4 0 ; seealso 5 THC IR . R . 4 7 .5 .3 (u n pu bl i shedopi n i on s pri or t o Jan u ary 1, 199 6, are preceden t i al)
. A s t h e pol i ce h a dp r o b a b le ca u s e to s e a r c h S te e le ’ s v e h ic le fo rc o n tr a b a n d , t h e yh a dp r o b a b le
cau se t o searc h t h e com pa rt m en tun der t h e c arpet i n t h e t run k of t h e veh i cl e.N o. 09- 10019

5 S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. R oss , 456 U
. S
. 798 , 825 ( 198 2)
. W h i l e O f f i cer W h i t e st ated t h at he w as act i n g on a hu n ch du ri n g t h e early pa rtof t h e survei l l an ce of

Steel e, t hi s i s i m m ater i ala s pr o babl e c aus e i s b as e d up o n o bj e c t ivefac t o r s , a nd the
s u bje c tiv e b e lie f o f th e p o lic e o ffic e rre g a r d in gw h e th e rh e h a s p r o b a b le ca u s e is ir r e le v a n t to th e d e te r m in a tio n . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. Cooper , 949 F. 2d 737, 744- 45 ( 5t h Ci r . 1 9 9 1 )
. Co n t r a r yt o S t e e l e ’ s a s s e r t i o n , t h e S u p r e m e Co u r t ’ s r e c e nt
r ul i ng i n G anti s i n ap pl i cabl e t o t h e present case a s the C ou rtspecif i cal l y l i m i t ed i t s r ul i ng t o s e ar c he s pu rsuantt o a n a r r e s t , a nd the Cour tdi d no tm o dif y t he
s ta n d a r d s r e g a r d in gs e a r c h e s p u r s u a n t to t h e a u to m o b ile e x c e p tio n . S ee1 29 S. Ct
. a t1 72 1. As t he s e ar c h of St e e l e ’ s v e hi c l e w as a ut ho r i z e d un de rt he
au t om obi l e excepti on , w ene e d no tde t e r m i n e w h et h er th e searc h w as au t h ori zed f orany o t herr eas on. St eel e h a s n ot show n t hatt he di st r i c tc our ter r ed by den yi n g h i s m ot i on t o sup press. A F F IR M E D
.