Court Opinion

ID: 9380694
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 00:00:20.599346+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:26.807644
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50274   Document: 00516682371   Page: 1   Date Filed: 03/20/2023

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                           ____________
                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                   Fifth Circuit
                            No. 22-50274
                          Summary Calendar                       FILED
                          ____________                      March 20, 2023
                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                     Clerk

                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                versus

   Rafael Robles-Hernandez,

                                               Defendant—Appellant,

                        consolidated with
                          _____________

                            No. 22-50576
                          _____________

   United States of America,

                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                versus

   Juan Jose Morales-Salazar,

                                               Defendant—Appellant,
Case: 22-50274        Document: 00516682371             Page: 2      Date Filed: 03/20/2023

                                       No. 22-50274
                                 c/w Nos. 22-50576, 22-50580
                                 consolidated with

                                    _____________

                                      No. 22-50580
                                    _____________

   United States of America,

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Edgar Ureste-Meza,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                    Appeals from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:21-CR-859-1
                    ______________________________

   Before Barksdale, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Rafael Robles-Hernandez, Juan Jose Morales-Salazar, and Edgar
   Ureste-Meza were indicted for illegal reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C.
   § 1326(a), (b)(1). They moved to suppress evidence regarding their being
   discovered in the United States, contending they were seized unlawfully in
   violation of the Fourth Amendment. The district court denied their motions,
   and each entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving the right to appeal the
   adverse suppression ruling.

          _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

                                               2
Case: 22-50274     Document: 00516682371          Page: 3    Date Filed: 03/20/2023

                                   No. 22-50274
                             c/w Nos. 22-50576, 22-50580
          They contend the court erred by denying their suppression motion
   because the Border Patrol agent who stopped the truck in which they were
   riding lacked reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop, and the unlawful stop
   led to defendants’ discovery. E.g., United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S.
   873, 884 (1975) (explaining factors for determining whether reasonable
   suspicion exists to execute stop).
          When considering the denial of a suppression motion, the district
   court’s legal conclusions are reviewed de novo; its factual findings, for clear
   error. E.g., United States v. Rodriguez, 33 F.4th 807, 810–11 (5th Cir. 2022).
   “[W]e may affirm the district court’s denial of a motion to suppress on any
   basis established in the record”. United States v. Hernandez-Mandujano, 721
   F.3d 345, 351 (5th Cir. 2013).
          We need not consider whether the court erred in its reasonable-
   suspicion analysis because “[t]he ‘body’ or identity of a defendant or
   respondent in a criminal or civil proceeding is never itself suppressible as a
   fruit of an unlawful arrest”. United States v. Roque-Villanueva, 175 F.3d 345,
   346 (5th Cir. 1999) (quoting INS v. Lopez-Medoza, 468 U.S. 1032, 1039
   (1984)).
          AFFIRMED.

                                         3