P u rsuan t t o 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5, t h e courtha s det erm i n ed that t h i s opi n i on * shou l d n otbe pu bl i shed an d i s not preceden texcept u n der t h e l i m i t ed c i r c um s t anc e s s e tf

o r t h i n 5 T H C IR . R. 47. 5. 4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 40559 Su m m ar y Cal 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. D AV I D LYL E G O N ZAL ES 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 S ou t h ernD i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 2: 08- C R

- 36- 1
B ef ore G A R Z A , D eM O S S , an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * D av i d Ly l e G o nz al e s a ppe al s hi s b en ch t ri alc o nvic t i o n f o rt r ans po r t i ng a n dmo v i n gu n d o c u me n t e da l i e n s w i t h i n t h e Un i t e dS t a t e s b ymo t o rv e h i c l e . H e c o n te n d s t h a t t h e d is tr ic t c o u r t e r r e db yd e n y in gh is m o tio n to s u p p r e s s a ll evi den ce obt ai n ed f

ol l ow i n g a tr af

f i c s t op of

hi s vehi cl e becau se t h e B order Pa t rol ag e ntw ho s t o ppe d hi s v e hi c l e l ac ke d r e as o nab l e s us pi c i o n. United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Februar y 20, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 40559

2 I n r e v ie w in g t h e d e n ia l o f a m o t io n t o s u p p r e s s , t h e d is t r i c tc o u r t ’s f i n di n gs of

factare r evi ew ed f or c l ear err or andit s c on cl u sion s o f la w are rev i ew edd e n o v o . Uni t e d St at e s v . Lo pez - Mo r e no , 420 F
. 3d420 , 429 ( 5th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ). “ [W ]e v i ew the ev i d en ce in th e li gh t m ost fav ora b l e to th e p a rty p rev a i l i n g b elow , w h i ch i n this case i s th e G ov ern m en t. ” I d.

“Ab order p atr ola gen tcon du ct i n g a rovi n g pa t rolm ay m ak e a t em porary in v e s tig a tiv e s to p o f av e h ic l e o n l yi f th e a g e n t is a w a r e o f s p e c ifica r tic u la b le f ac t s , t ogether w i t h rat i on ali n ferences f rom t h ose fact s, thatr e as o nab ly w arr ant
su sp i ci on tha t th e v eh i cl e’s o c c u p a n t i s en ga ge di n cri m i n a lactivity. ” Un i t ed S t ate s v. Ja cqu i n ot , 258 F
. 3d423 , 427 ( 5t h C i r . 200 1)
. I n a s s e s s i ng w he t he rt he
s t o p was s upp o r t e d b y r e as on able s us pi c i o n, w e c o ns i de rt he t o t ali t y o f t he
c i r c um s t anc e s i n l i ghto f fac t o r s s e tf

o r t h i n Un i t ed Stat es v. B rign on i

- Pon ce , 422 U .S . 8 7 3 , 8 8 4 -8 5 (1 9 7 5 ). I d. I n t he pr e s e ntc as e , U ni t e d St at e s Bor de rPat r o lAge ntD o nal d J o s e ph K en e frick t est i f

i ed that he i n i t i al l y observed G on zal es’ s FordE xp edi t i on on Hi ghwa y4 4 n e a rF r e e r , T e x a s , a l m o s t6 0 mi l e s f r o m t h e M e x i c a n b o r d e r . As t her e w as no e vi denc e pre se nt ed t hatA gentK enef r i c k had r eas on t o b eli evet hat G on zal es’ s vehi cl e ha d com e f rom the border, t h e proxi m i t y t o t h e border fact or is n o t p r e s e n t a n d w e m u s t e x a m in e th e re m a in in gfa c to r s ch a r ily
. S ee Un i t ed St at e s v . Rodr iguez - R i v as , 1 5 1 F .3d3 7 7 , 3 8 0 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 8 ). A gen tK en ef

ri ck, w h o ha s w orkedas a B order Pa t rolagen ti n t h e F reer ar ea f orf ourye ar s, t es t i f

i ed t hatthe ar ea w as com m onl y us ed bys m uggl er s, as dem on st rat ed byt h e daily com pl ai n t s t h e B order Pa t rolrec eivedf rom area r e s i de nt s an dt h e n u m b e ro f a r r e s t s h e h a dmad e i n t h e a r e a . T h i s t e s t i m o ny s ho w e d thatt he c har ac t e r i s t i c s o f t he a r e a fac t o r , t he i nf o r m at i o n a bo utr e c e nt i l l e g a l tr a ffi cki n g i n t h e area fact or, an d the exp eri en ce of t h e agen tfact or w e ig h e dinfa v o ro f r e a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n . See Ja cq u in ot , 258 F. 3d at428- 30. A g e n t K e n e fr ic k a v e r r e d th a t it w a s u n u s u a l fo rav e h ic le n o t r e la te dto th e o il i nd u s t r y t o b e t r a v e l i n g o n Hi g h wa y 4 4 a t 5 : 3 0 a . m . a s Go n z a l e s wa s , m ak i ngN o. 08- 40559

3 th e u s u a l t r a ffic p a tt e r n s fa c to rw e ig h infa v o ro f r e a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n . Se ei d. at 429
. H e f

u rt h er m ai n t ai n ed th at t h e rear bu m per of G on zal es’ s E x p e d iti on w as r i di ng l ow ert han t he f r ontbum per , i ndi c at i n g th a t s om et hi ng heavy w as i n t h e veh i cl e beyon d the driver an d f ou r passeng e rs th at he w as abl e t o see. Thi s t e s t i m o ny s ho w e d thatt he c har act eri st i c s o f t he v e hi c l e fac t o ra nd the
n u m ber, app earan ce, an d beh aviorof t h e passen gers f

act or w e igh e d at l east
s lig h tlyin fa v o ro f r e a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. L opez- G on zalez , 9 1 6 F .2 d1 0 1 1 , 1 0 1 5 (5 th C ir . 1 9 9 0 ); Un i t ed S t ate s v. Za p a t a-Iba rra , 212 F. 3d 877 , 883 ( 5th C i r. 200 0)
. A gen tK en ef ri ck t est i f

i ed that w h enG on zal es passed h i s m arked patrol veh i cl e, G on zal es t ap pedhi s breaks even t h ou gh he w as not speed i n g. W h en G on zal es app roachedF reer, he m ad e a l ef tt u rn o n t o a r e s id e n ti a ls t r e e t, a n dA g e n t K e n e fr ic kte s tifie dth a t s m u g g le r s co m m o n ly t u rnedonto a r e sid e n ti alst reeti n F reer t o avoi d the w el ll i ti n t ersec t i on of H i ghway5 9 andH i ghway16 be c aus e t he r e w as us uall y a l aw enf o r c e m e nt of f i cer st ati on ed at t h at i n t ersection
. A ccor di n gl y, t h e beh aviorof t h e driver fa c to rw e ig h e dinfa v o ro f r e a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n . S ee Jacqu i n ot , 258 F. 3d at 429- 3 0 ; Un i t ed S t ate s v. V i l lalobos , 1 6 1 F .3d2 8 5 , 2 9 1 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 8 ). W h i l e t h e i m portant proxi m i t y t o t h e b o rd er fact or w ei gh ed ag ai n st
r e as o nab l e s us pi c i o n, t he t o t ali t y o f t he c i r c um s t ances s ho w e d thatAge nt K e ne f r i c k ha d ar e as o nab l e sus pi c i o n o f il l e ga la c t ivit y s uf

f i c i e ntt o m ak e t he t r a ffic s to p . S ee Jacqu i n ot , 258 F. 3d at430; Un i t ed S t ate s v. A l d aco , 1 6 8 F. 3d 14 8, 1 50

- 52 ( 5t h Ci r . 1 99 9)
. Ac c o r di ngly, t he di s t r i c tco ur tdi d no te r rb y de nyi ng th e m o tio n to s u p p r e s s . S ee Jacqu i n ot , 258 F. 3d at430. G on zal es al so argu es t h at t h e w rit t en j u dg m en tdoes not properly ref l ect th e cor rect term of su p erv i sed releas e im p ose db yt h e distri ct cou rt at a
r e s e nt e nci ng he ar i ng. The w r i t t e n j udg m e nt , ho w e ve r , w as e nt e r e d a f t e rt he
r e s en ten ci n g h ea ri n g, a n d th e m i n u te en try of th e resen ten ci n g h ea ri n gis
u n s ig n e da n dd o e s n o t u n e q u iv o c a llys h o w th a t t h e w r i tt e n ju d g m e n t is i nc o r r e c t
. A t r ans c r i pto f t he r e s e nt e nc i ng he ar i ng do e s notappe ari n t he r e c o r d,N o. 08- 40559

4 andG o nz al e s ha s no tr e que s t e d at r ans c r i pto f t he h ear i ng f

o rt he pr e s e nt ap pea l
. G on zal es, as th e app el l an t , ha s t h e du t y t o request t h e necessary tr a n s c r ip ts fo rh is a p p e a l. S eeF ED . R. A PP . P. 1 0 (b )(1 ); F ED . R. A PP . P. 1 1 ( a )
. As t h e rec ord i s i n suff

i ci en tt o sub st an t i ate G on zal es’ s asser t i on , he i s not en t i t l ed to re lie f. S ee Po w ell v . Este lle , 959 F. 2d 22, 26 ( 5t h C i r . 1992)
. I f G onzal es c an dem ons t r at e i n t he f ut ure t hatt he w r i t t en j udgm entd oe s notr ef l ec tt he o r al pron ou n cem en tof

sentence an d i s t h e res u l tof a cl eri calerr or, h e c a n f i l e a m o tio n t o c o r r e c t th e c le r ic a l e r r o rin th e d is tr ic t c o u r t. S eeF ED . R. C RIM . P. 36. AF F I RMED.