Fifth Circuit Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the 5th Circuit Federal Court - Court of Appeals

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions - 5th Circuit
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This opinion or court case is from the Fifth Circuit Court or Appeals. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 92-8111
Conference Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ELENA HERNANDEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
- - - - - - - - - -
(October 22, 1992)
Before DUHÉ, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Elena Hernandez was charged with conspiracy to possess
marijuana with intent to distribute and possession of marijuana
with intent to distribute after marijuana was found in her car
during a search at a permanent border patrol checkpoint. Her
motion to suppress was denied, and she entered a conditional
guilty plea to count two of the indictment, reserving her right
to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress. She was
sentenced to 33 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised
release.
Hernandez argues that her initial detention at secondary and
the exterior canine search of her car were unconstitutional. The
determination that a search or seizure did not violate the fourth

No. 92-8111
-2-
amendment is a question of law reviewed de novo. U.S. v.
Martinez-Perez, 941 F.2d 295, 297 (5th Cir. 1991), cert. denied,
112 S.Ct. 1295 (1992).
"[S]tops for brief questioning routinely conducted at
permanent checkpoints are consistent with the Fourth Amendment
and need not be authorized by warrant." U.S. v. Martinez-Fuerte,
428 U.S. 543, 566, 96 S.Ct. 3074, 49 L.Ed.2d 1116 (1976). Border
patrol agents may stop motorists, question them about their
citizenship, and selectively refer them to secondary without
individualized suspicion. Id. at 562-63. Agents may also make
referrals to conduct inquiries about controlled substances. See
U.S. v. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d 206, 207 (5th Cir. 1990).
Border patrol agents, however, may not conduct a warrantless
search of the referred vehicle without consent or probable cause.
Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d at 207. A canine "sniff" of the exterior
of a car does not constitute a search within the fourth
amendment. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d at 207-80; U.S. v. Gonzalez-
Basulto, 898 F.2d 1011, 1013 (5th cir. 1990).
Border Patrol Agent Arzate properly referred Hernandez's car
to secondary and conducted a canine "sniff." Once the dog
alerted Arzate had probable cause to search the car and legally
discovered the marijuana. Gonzalez-Basulto, 898 F.2d at 1013.
The district court properly denied the motion to suppress.

AFFIRMED.