IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41737

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

JUAN VALDEZ-MOLINA, 

 Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:15-CR-86-2

Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant Valdez-Molina was tried and convicted of conspiracy to 

transport, and transporting, illegal aliens. The conviction is supported by 

Defendant’s admissions in response to his interview and by his signed 

statement. He appeals, claiming that the confession was tainted by illegal 

arrest. We see the conduct of the arresting officers to be entirely proper and 

affirm.

 

* 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

FILED

February 8, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41737 Document: 00513868162 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/08/2017
No. 15-41737

2

These events began one morning when a vehicle pulled into the 

Falfurrias border patrol checkpoint. The officer, following the usual procedure, 

came to the driver’s window and inquired about the citizenship of the 

occupants. There were four persons in the car. A woman named Cindy Rojas 

was the driver and Defendant was seated in the back seat on the same side of 

the car as the driver. Two males sat on seats at the far side of the automobile. 

The interrogation left questionable impression for the officer. The driver 

answered questions for the two men on the other side of the car and they 

responded only with a “yes.” The man in the far front seat appeared to the 

officer to be nervous. Because the officer’s investigation had not obtained 

satisfactory responses and appeared to be suspicious in the failure to give 

prompt answers to the citizenship inquiry, the car was then moved to a 

secondary investigation. There the nervous passenger admitted that he was 

not legally present in the United States. With that information and the 

conduct of the four people, the totality of all facts within the officer’s knowledge 

would lead a reasonable person to suspect the commission of an offense. That 

was probable cause warranting the arrest of all four.

The four persons were separated for interviews as is the custom. At the 

outset of the interview the Defendant was given the full Miranda warning. 

The Defendant was told in his first interview that Cindy Rojas had admitted 

that they both knew the inhabitants to be illegal aliens, and that the Defendant 

had agreed to receive $500.00 to help her smuggle the aliens. The Defendant, 

however, denied then that he knew the passengers were illegals. 

The first interview with Defendant lasted 10 to 15 minutes and the 

second interview five to 10 minutes, and in the third interview the Defendant

confessed to knowing the illegality of the passengers and to agreeing to help 

smuggle them with Rojas and to receive from her $500.00 for that assistance. 

 Case: 15-41737 Document: 00513868162 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/08/2017
No. 15-41737

3

We find no error by the trial judge in denying suppression of the 

confession, and the decision of the border control officer to arrest the Defendant

was justified. The officer had an objective basis for the suspicion that

Defendant was engaged in the transportation of illegal aliens, a view of these 

circumstances by an officer trained to do so. See United States v. Cortez, 101 

S. Ct. 690, 695 (1981). The verdict of the jury was supported by the evidence 

that the confessions were made knowingly and voluntarily.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-41737 Document: 00513868162 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/08/2017