Court Opinion

ID: 9365414
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-24 01:00:25.970611+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:45.517365
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50165         Document: 00516619951             Page: 1      Date Filed: 01/23/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-50165
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                                                                January 23, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Teodoro De La Torre-Mercado,

                                                                   Defendant—Appellant.

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 3:21-CR-223-1

   Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Plaintiff-Appellant Teodoro De La Torre-Mercado appeals his
   conviction following a bench trial for illegal reentry after removal. After he
   was initially arrested by an El Paso County Sheriff’s deputy, he was
   transferred to the custody of the U.S. Border Patrol. While in that custody,
   De La Torre-Mercado admitted that he was a citizen of Mexico and was here

          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50165      Document: 00516619951             Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/23/2023

                                      No. 22-50165

   without proper documentation. This was confirmed by an immigration
   check. On appeal, he contends that the evidence obtained by Border Patrol
   agents—his verbal statements, identification, and immigration records—
   should have been suppressed as fruits of an illegal seizure, and that the
   district court erred in denying his pretrial motion to suppress that evidence.
   When reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, we consider the district
   court’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for clear error.
   United States v. Rodriguez, 33 F.4th 807, 810–11 (5th Cir. 2022).
          Appellant concedes that, even if we assume that the deputy’s initial
   stop was illegal, his contention that the district court should have suppressed
   his   identity    evidence    is     foreclosed.     See     United   States   v.
   Hernandez-Mandujano, 721 F.3d 345, 347, 351 (5th Cir. 2013); United States
   v. Roque-Villanueva, 175 F.3d 345, 346 (5th Cir. 1999). Appellant’s attempt
   to distinguish our precedent on the basis that the initial stop involved a state
   versus a federal actor is meritless. See Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206,
   215 (1960) (“To the victim it matters not whether his constitutional right has
   been invaded by a federal agent or by a state officer.”). Although Appellant
   contends that Roque-Villanueva was wrongly decided, we may not overrule a
   prior decision of another panel in the absence of an intervening contrary
   decision by this court sitting en banc or by the Supreme Court. See United
   States v. Traxler, 764 F.3d 486, 489 (5th Cir. 2014).
          The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                           2