IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50749

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DURON WILSON HENTON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:13-CR-403-1

Before KING, JOLLY, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After a conditional guilty plea, Duron Wilson Henton was convicted on 

one count of conspiracy to distribute heroin and one count of possession with 

the intent to distribute heroin. On appeal, Henton argues that the district 

court erred by failing to suppress evidence seized from his vehicle following a 

traffic stop. When reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, we review 

* 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

April 20, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50749 Document: 00513011437 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2015
No. 14-50749

factual findings for clear error and conclusions of law de novo. United States 

v. Pack, 612 F.3d 341, 347 (5th Cir. 2010).

The district court did not err by concluding that the initial stop was 

based on both a traffic violation and reasonable suspicion of a drug offense, and 

that the detention was not unreasonably prolonged. Prior to the traffic stop, 

the officer was aware of information obtained from two confidential informants 

(CIs) and the investigation into that information. Specifically, the two CIs

provided information that someone named Duron was in town from Michigan 

trying to sell large amounts of heroin, that Duron was tied to a residence where 

drugs had previously been found, and that heroin had been offered to both of 

the CIs. After surveillance of the residence, an officer identified a vehicle with 

Michigan license plates registered to Henton, who had an extensive criminal 

history involving large amounts of drugs. As the officer was writing out a 

search warrant for the residence, one of the CIs alerted him that Henton was 

leaving the area. 

Henton was pulled over for a traffic violation but also because the officers 

had reasonable suspicion of drug activity. See United States v. Powell, 732 

F.3d 361, 371-72 (5th Cir. 2013). Even if the pre-stop information did not 

amount to reasonable suspicion justifying the stop or the prolonged detention, 

during the course of the ensuing traffic stop, Henton acted extremely nervous 

and gave conflicting information. Given the totality of the circumstances, 

including the information developed before and after the stop, the officer had 

reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop and conduct the dog sniff. See 

United States v. Powell, 732 F.3d 361, 371-72 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. 

Andres, 703 F.3d 828, 833-34 (5th Cir. 2013).

Henton’s vehicle was searched after the drug dog performed a sniff 

around the vehicle and alerted. The canine officer provided detailed testimony 

2

 Case: 14-50749 Document: 00513011437 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2015
No. 14-50749

about the dog’s behavior. The district court did not err by concluding that the 

alert established probable cause to search Henton’s vehicle. See Florida v. 

Harris, 133 S. Ct. 1050, 1056-58 and n.2 (2013).

AFFIRMED.

3

 Case: 14-50749 Document: 00513011437 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/20/2015