Filed: Jul. 03, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-51089 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JACOBO LOEWEN-NEUFELD, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. P-00-CR-214-1 - - - - - - - - - - July 2, 2001 Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jacobo Loewen-Neufeld appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction for possession with in
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 00-51089 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JACOBO LOEWEN-NEUFELD, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. P-00-CR-214-1 - - - - - - - - - - July 2, 2001 Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Jacobo Loewen-Neufeld appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction for possession with int..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-51089
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JACOBO LOEWEN-NEUFELD,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. P-00-CR-214-1
- - - - - - - - - -
July 2, 2001
Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jacobo Loewen-Neufeld appeals his conditional guilty plea
conviction for possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
He argues that: (1) the district court erred in denying his
motion to suppress the evidence obtained from a roving border
patrol stop, and (2) his detention unconstitutionally exceeded
the original scope of the stop.
A border patrol agent conducting a roving patrol may make a
temporary investigative stop of a vehicle only if the agent is
aware of specific articulable facts, together with rational
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 00-51089
-2-
inferences from those facts, that reasonably warrant suspicion
that the vehicle’s occupant is engaged in criminal activity. See
United States v. Brignoni-Ponce,
422 U.S. 873, 884 (1975); United
States v. Cortez,
449 U.S. 411, 417-18 (1981). Consideration of
the relevant factors, viewed in the totality of the circumstances
and in the light most favorable to the Government, indicates that
there was reasonable suspicion for the stop of the pickup truck
driven by Loewen-Neufeld. See United States v. Inocencio,
40
F.3d 716, 721-22 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court did not err
in denying Loewen-Neufeld’s motion to suppress.
Loewen-Neufeld’s argument that his continued detention
exceeded the original scope of the stop was not raised in his
motion to suppress. Accordingly, it was not preserved for appeal
pursuant to the terms of the conditional guilty plea. The issue
is, therefore, waived. See Fed R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2).
AFFIRMED.