Court Opinion

ID: 9383742
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-31 00:00:21.511886+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:47.698250
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-10347        Document: 00516695143             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/30/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-10347
                                    Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                    ____________                                March 30, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                         Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Koby Lee Sparks,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:21-CR-133-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Davis, Duncan, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Koby Lee Sparks appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm
   after a felony conviction and possession with intent to distribute
   methamphetamine. He argues that the district court erred in denying his
   motion to suppress evidence seized during an encounter with police officers
   who were responding to a complaint that Sparks had caused a disturbance.

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-10347      Document: 00516695143          Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/30/2023

                                    No. 22-10347

          We assume, without deciding, that Sparks preserved the arguments
   he raises on appeal. See United States v. Pope, 467 F.3d 912, 918-19 & n.20
   (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Rodriguez, 602 F.3d 346, 361 (5th Cir. 2010).
   We review the district court’s “factual findings for clear error and the
   ultimate constitutionality of law enforcement action de novo.” United States
   v. Robinson, 741 F.3d 588, 594 (5th Cir. 2014).
          Although Sparks argues that the police did not have probable cause to
   initially stop him as he was walking toward his vehicle, the officers did not
   need probable cause because they were conducting an investigatory stop,
   which required only reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. See
   United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7 (1989); United States v. Sanders, 994
   F.2d 200, 206 (5th Cir. 1993). Moreover, given that the police observed in
   plain view inside Sparks’s vehicle an open beer container, an apparent
   marijuana joint, and a handgun stuffed between the passenger seat and the
   center console, they had reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was
   taking place, including a violation of former Texas Penal Code § 46.02(a-1).
   See Tex. Penal Code § 46.02(a-1) (effective Sept. 1, 2019); United States
   v. Garza, 727 F.3d 436, 440 (5th Cir. 2013). Sparks’s contention that he
   qualified for an exemption to that statute does not change our conclusion, as
   the officers were not required to “rule out the possibility of innocent
   conduct” before stopping him. United States v. Thomas, 997 F.3d 603, 610
   (5th Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), cert. denied,
   142 S. Ct. 828 (2022).
          AFFIRMED.

                                             2