Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo SOSA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-09-19
Citations: 697 F. App'x 551
Docket Number: No. 16-10214
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo SOSA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 551–551

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eduardo SOSA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-10214
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted September 12, 2017 San Francisco, California
Filed September 19, 2017
Robert Lally Miskell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, USTU-Office of the US Attorney, Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Saul M. Huerta, Attorney, The Huerta Law Office, Tucson, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant
Before: KOZINSKI and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT, District Judge.
The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Eduardo Sosa challenges the denial of his motion to suppress, arguing that Border Patrol Agents lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop.
An officer may conduct an investigatory stop of a person or vehicle if he has reasonable suspicion to believe that criminal activity "may be afoot." United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, 273, 122 S.Ct. 744, 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002) (quoting United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7, 109 S.Ct. 1581, 104 L.Ed.2d 1 (1989)). To determine whether a stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, we look at the totality of the circumstances. Id. In the context of border patrol stops, the factors we consider include: "(1) characteristics of the area; (2) proximity to the border; (3) usual patterns of traffic and time of day; (4) previous alien or drug smuggling in the area; (5) behavior of the driver, including 'obvious attempts to evade officers'; (6) appearance or behavior of passengers; (7) model and appearance of the vehicle; and, (8) officer experience." United States v. Garcia-Barron, 116 F.3d 1305, 1307 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 885, 95 S.Ct. 2574, 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975)). In addition, "the notoriety of a road as an alien smuggling route . [is] a relevant factor supporting reasonable suspicion." United States v. Palos-Marquez, 591 F.3d 1272, 1277 (9th Cir. 2010).
Here, the behavior of the men whom the car picked up, the íocation and timing of the pickup, and the movement of the car, taken together, demonstrate that the agents had reasonable suspicion to conduct the stop.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.