United States v. Jauregui-Esparza

1 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 11, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-50963
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ANTONIO JAUREGUI-ESPARZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. DR-02-CR-665-1-WWJ
--------------------
Before DUHÉ, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:1
Antonio Jauregui-Esparza (“Jauregui”) appeals from his
conviction by guilty plea of possession with intent to distribute
marijuana. Jauregui retained his right to appeal from the denial
of his motion to suppress evidence, and he contends that Border
Patrol agents lacked reasonable suspicion to stop his pickup after
it was observed on Ranch Road 2523 near Del Rio, Texas.
The Border Patrol agents in Jauregui’s case had reasonable
suspicion to stop the pickup. Jauregui was traveling in an area

-- 1 of 2 --

2
close to the border, on a road frequently used to avoid a Border
Patrol checkpoint. Agent Rene Carrasco was familiar with RR 2523,
having patrolled the road for eight years. Jauregui’s vehicle was
very clean, which in Agent Carrasco’s experience was unusual for
the area. Jauregui did not respond to Agent Carrasco’s wave, and
he accelerated and drove away very fast after his initial encounter
with Agent Carrasco. Jauregui did not stop until agents activated
their lights. By the time Jauregui was stopped, agents could have
reasonably suspected that Jauregui was involved in criminal
activity. See United States v. Inocencio, 40 F.3d 716, 722 (5th
Cir. 1994). The district court did not err by denying the motion
to suppress.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --