United States v. Padilla-Esparza

by
United States Customs and Border Protection issued a "Be on the Lookout" ("BOLO") alert for Daniel Padilla-Esparza and his truck for suspected bulk cash or drug smuggling. Padilla-Esparza was a Mexican citizen and United States lawful permanent resident. Based on the BOLO, United States Border Patrol agents ("BPAs") stopped Padilla-Esparza after he crossed the Las Cruces, New Mexico border patrol checkpoint. The BPAs released him because they believed they had stopped the wrong truck. When they discovered a few minutes later they had actually stopped the right truck, they initiated a second stop. After a drug-detection dog alerted to the presence of narcotics, they discovered 16 kilograms of cocaine in a non-factory compartment. Based on the evidence seized, a federal grand jury charged Padilla-Esparza with one count of possession with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine. He moved to suppress, arguing the BPAs seized evidence in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The district court denied his motion. He then entered a conditional guilty plea, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. Padilla-Esparza challenged the district court's denial of his motion to suppress on two grounds: (1) the first stop (on September 13, 2013) was unlawful because Customs and Border Protection lacked reasonable suspicion to issue the (September 10, 2013) BOLO, which was the basis for the stop; and (2) the BPAs lacked reasonable suspicion for their second stop. The Tenth Circuit concluded reasonable suspicion supported both the BOLO and the second stop. Accordingly, the Court affirmed. View "United States v. Padilla-Esparza" on Justia Law