Court Opinion

ID: 25830
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 08:44:04+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:08.865570
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                         _____________________

                              No. 01-50113
                         _____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

          v.

BOBBY LEE EARLS
                                 Defendant-Appellant

_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Texas
_________________________________________________________________
                          November 6, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, DAVIS, Circuit Judge, and VANCE*,

District Judge.

PER CURIAM:**

     Defendant–Appellant Bobby Lee Earls appeals his conviction

on one count of possession with intent to distribute five grams

or more of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1)

and (b)(1)(B).    Specifically, Earls challenges the district

court’s denial of his motion to suppress the evidence seized as a

     *
      District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana,
sitting by designation.

     **
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
result of what Earls contends was an illegal stop and detention.

We need not decide whether the information contained in the

anonymous tip alone was sufficiently reliable to provide

reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop.    The combination of the

anonymous tip and the independent corroborating observations of

the investigating officers--the shouted warning by the woman in

the apartment complex, Earls’s evasive and nervous behavior, and

his presence in an area known for drug trafficking--was

sufficient to provide the officers with reasonable suspicion to

stop the cab in which Earls was riding.    See Illinois v. Wardlow,

528 U.S. 119, 124 (2000).   The motion to suppress was correctly

denied.

     Earls’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

                                 2