United States v. Victor Molinero Puente ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 18-40935      Document: 00515137224         Page: 1    Date Filed: 09/30/2019
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 18-40935                             FILED
    Summary Calendar                  September 30, 2019
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    VICTOR MANUEL MOLINERO PUENTE,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 5:18-CR-37-2
    Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Defendant-Appellant Victor Manuel Molinero Puente appeals his
    conviction for importation of 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana in violation
    of 21 U.S.C. §§ 963, 952(a), and 960(a)(1), (b)(1)(G) on the grounds that the
    district court should have granted his motion to suppress evidence. For the
    following reasons, we AFFIRM.
    * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
    CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 18-40935     Document: 00515137224     Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/30/2019
    No. 18-40935
    On December 20, 2017, Customs and Border Patrol discovered a large
    supply of marijuana in Mario Sanchez Villa’s trailer as he entered the United
    States.    Sanchez Villa agreed to cooperate with Homeland Security
    Investigations (“HSI”) by making a “controlled delivery” of the drugs to reveal
    the identities of other individuals involved in the trafficking. HSI Agent Juan
    Lozano asked Officer Frank Estrada with the Laredo Police Department to
    stand by if a traffic stop was needed.
    During the delivery, agents identified a nearby truck driven by Molinero
    Puente as likely involved in the trafficking. Agent Lozano instructed Officer
    Estrada to stop Molinero Puente. Before Officer Estrada pulled him over, he
    noticed that Molinero Puente’s temporary license plate was expired. After
    Officer Estrada stopped him, Molinero Puente could not provide a valid driver’s
    license; he produced a fake Texas identification card. After Officer Estrada
    finished investigating Molinero Puente’s traffic violations, HSI agents
    approached the vehicles, arrested Molinero Puente without a warrant, and
    transported him to HSI offices. Molinero Puente admitted that he was serving
    as a “look out for law enforcement” for Sanchez Villa, whom he knew was
    transporting narcotics.
    Molinero Puente moved to suppress his stop, arrest, and the resulting
    evidence, arguing that the authorities lacked reasonable suspicion or probable
    cause to stop and arrest him. The district court denied Molinero Puente’s
    motion on grounds that probable cause existed to stop and arrest Molinero
    Puente because of his “scout car pattern of travel” in relation to Sanchez Villa.
    In considering the denial of a motion to suppress, “this court reviews the
    district court’s fact findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo.”
    United States v. Rounds, 
    749 F.3d 326
    , 337 (5th Cir. 2014). All evidence is
    viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, here the
    2
    Case: 18-40935     Document: 00515137224     Page: 3   Date Filed: 09/30/2019
    No. 18-40935
    Government. 
    Id. at 338.
    Whether probable cause existed is a mixed question
    of fact and law; “the factual findings underlying the district court’s probable
    cause determination” are reviewed for clear error, while “the legal question of
    whether those facts establish probable cause” are reviewed de novo. United
    States v. Hearn, 
    563 F.3d 95
    , 102-03 (5th Cir. 2009).
    This court may affirm on any basis that is supported by the record.
    United States v. Richmond, 
    915 F.3d 352
    , 359 & n.7 (5th Cir. 2019). Regardless
    of Molinero Puente’s purported conduct as a “scout” vehicle for Sanchez Villa,
    Officer Estrada and Agent Lozano had probable cause to stop and arrest
    Molinero Puente in light of his three violations of Texas law—driving with an
    expired license plate, driving without a valid driver’s license, and possession of
    a “fictitious” driver’s license, TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. §§ 502.407, 521.021,
    521.451. See Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 
    532 U.S. 318
    , 354 (2001); see also
    Virginia v. Moore, 
    553 U.S. 164
    , 166, 178 (2008) (holding that the Fourth
    Amendment is not violated by making an arrest for driving with a suspended
    license based on probable cause but prohibited by state law); Price v. Roark,
    
    256 F.3d 364
    , 370 (5th Cir. 2001) (holding that no Fourth Amendment violation
    occurred when defendant was arrested for driving without license tags).
    Furthermore, Officer Estrada’s knowledge of Molinero Puente’s traffic
    violations was imputed to Agent Lozano who made the arrest based on the
    collective knowledge doctrine because they communicated throughout the
    operation. See United States v. Ibarra, 
    493 F.3d 526
    , 530 (5th Cir. 2007).
    Finally, it is irrelevant that Officer Estrada initially planned to stop Molinero
    Puente at the direction of Agent Lozano because his traffic violations “would
    have objectively justified the stop” and arrest. See United States v. Harris, 
    566 F.3d 422
    , 434-35 (5th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks and citation
    3
    Case: 18-40935   Document: 00515137224     Page: 4   Date Filed: 09/30/2019
    No. 18-40935
    omitted). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment denying Molinero Puente’s
    motion to suppress is AFFIRMED.
    4