United States v. David Perez-Lemos , 357 F. App'x 48 ( 2009 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 17 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-50545
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. No. 3:08-cr-01191-DMS-2
v.
MEMORANDUM *
DAVID PEREZ-LEMOS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Dana M. Sabraw, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted November 4, 2009
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER, BERZON and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Border Patrol agents received an anonymous tip stating that an SUV and a
white sedan were stopped together on Highway 94, and that the SUV was being
loaded with bodies. The agents could have reasonably concluded that this tip was
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
corroborated by their observation of two cars matching that description which were
traveling together north (away from the border) on Buckman Springs Road, a street
that connects with Highway 94 near where the SUV and white sedan reportedly
stopped. The agents observed silhouettes of people crouching behind the SUV’s
driver, and noted that the SUV appeared heavily laden, which provided further
corroboration for the tip. Moreover, the agents testified that, in their experience,
individuals involved in alien smuggling regularly make use of a load vehicle and
scout car to avoid detection. We must give due weight to the opinions of officers
who “draw on their own experience and specialized training to make inferences
from and deductions about the cumulative information available.” United States v.
Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, 273 (2002). Based on the tip and their own observations,
interpreted in light of their experience, the officers could reasonably infer that the
two vehicles were working together in an illegal alien smuggling operation. See
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 884–85 (1975). Further supporting
this reasonable factual inference was the notoriety of the area for alien smuggling,
see United States v. Berber-Tinoco, 510 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th Cir. 2007), the fact
that the suspicious activities occurred at the time of day when smuggling most
frequently occurs, see Arvizu, 534 U.S. at 277, and the white sedan’s evasive
driving maneuvers, see Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. at 885. Therefore, in light of the
-2-
totality of the circumstances, and giving due weight to the expertise of the officers
involved, we conclude that the circumstances were sufficient to “paint a picture
that would create in the mind of a trained border patrol agent a reasonable
suspicion” that the white sedan was engaged in illegal activity. United States v.
Guzman-Padilla, 573 F.3d 865, 882 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting United States v.
Franco-Munoz, 952 F.2d 1055, 1058 (9th Cir. 1991)).
AFFIRMED.
-3-