Opinion ID: 216541
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether the Traffic Stop Was Justified at Its Inception

Text: Turning first to whether this stop was justified at its inception, we conclude that Trestyn and Herren waived the argument that the traffic stop was not justified at its inception. Both Trestyn and Herren conceded in their motions to suppress that the traffic stop initiated by Trooper Nykun was justified at its inception because of the minivan's failure to display a front license plate. ( See Aplt. Trestyn App., vol. I at 29 (The defense agrees that Trooper Nykun had reasonable cause to stop Mr. Trestyn and investigate his missing license plate.); Aplt. Herren App., vol. I at 44 (The defense agrees that Trooper Nykun had reasonable cause to stop the van and investigate its missing license plate.).) Based on that concession, Judge Brimmer did not address this first part of the Terry inquiry when he denied the motions to suppress. In their motion for reconsideration, Trestyn and Herren argued for the first time that the traffic stop was not justified at its inception. Trestyn and Herren asserted that Wyoming law does not require out-of-state vehicles passing through Wyoming to display two license plates. But as Judge Johnson correctly noted, arguments raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration are not properly before the [district] court and generally need not be addressed. United States v. Castillo-Garcia, 117 F.3d 1179, 1197 (10th Cir.1997), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Ramirez-Encarnacion, 291 F.3d 1219, 1222 n. 1 (10th Cir.2002). Normally, when an argument is not considered or ruled upon by the district court, we will not address it on appeal. Burnette v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 849 F.2d 1277, 1285 (10th Cir.1988). Because this argument was not considered or ruled upon by the district court, we decline to address it on appeal. Therefore, we assume for the purposes of this appeal that the traffic stop was justified at its inception.