USA v. Trujillo

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v. 	No. CR 25-0549-001 KG
RUBEN JOSE TRUJILLO,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Suppress, Doc. 56. Mr. Trujillo
argues officers arrested him on October 29, 2024 “without probable cause” in violation of the
Fourth Amendment. Doc. 56 at 1. He seeks to suppress “all evidence obtained from the arrest”
and “the subsequent search of his vehicle” as “fruit of the poisonous tree.” 	Id. at 3. 	The
Government responded, Doc. 57, and the Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 3, 2026,
Doc. 66. For the reasons below, the Court denies the Motion to Suppress.
I. 	Findings of Fact
Detective Antonio Luna of the Doña Ana County Sheriff’s Office (“DASO”) was the sole
witness to testify at the evidentiary hearing. The Court’s finding of fact includes the following as
well as those articulated on the record at the conclusion of evidence that included testimony and
exhibits. See Draft Tr. at 38–41,1 Gov’t. Exs. 1–14.
On October 28, 2024, an individual broke into a Family Dollar store in Vado, New Mexico.
See Doc. 57 at 2. After forcing entry, the suspect removed a black handgun from his waistband
1 The Court’s citation to the hearing transcript refers to the court reporter’s original, unedited
version. Any final transcript may contain some differences in page and line numbers.
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 1 of 6

2
and pointed it at two employees, who fled to a back room and locked the door. Id. The suspect
fired a shot at the door. Id. He then removed money from an open cash register, grabbed a different
cash register, and fled the scene. Id.
The morning after the robbery, Detective Luna reviewed Family Dollar’s security footage.
Draft Tr. at 32. Detective Luna observed that the suspect was wearing a black mask, a gray sweater
with a “black emblem” on the left chest, blue jeans, black shoes, one white glove, and one black
glove. See Doc. 57 at 2. Detective Luna also observed visible tattoos above the suspect’s right
eyebrow, along his hairline, and on the back of his neck, including the number “5,” and noted that
the suspect walked with a slight limp. Id. at 2–3.
Later that morning, between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m., Detective Luna reviewed inmate
photographs at the Doña Ana County Detention Center. Draft Tr. at 32. He identified Ruben Jose
Trujillo, a former inmate with a “575” tattoo on the back of his neck and a tattoo above his right
eyebrow. Id. While comparing Mr. Trujillo’s inmate photograph with the surveillance footage,
Detective Luna observed that the two men shared a similar skin tone, eye color, eye shape, hairline,
and forehead shape. Draft Tr. at 20. That morning, Detective Luna also reviewed what he believed
to be Mr. Trujillo’s social media account, which showed photographs of Mr. Trujillo with a similar
hairline tattoo and a gray sweater with an emblem on the left chest. Id.; Draft Tr. at 22. Detective
Luna also observed photographs of a woman who appeared to be Mr. Trujillo’s girlfriend and two
newborn babies. Draft Tr. at 24, 28.
On October 29, 2024, DASO officers, including Detective Luna, began surveilling a
residence believed to be Mr. Trujillo’s in the early afternoon. 	Id. at 28. 	Around 5:00 p.m.,
Detective Luna observed an individual arrive who appeared to be Mr. Trujillo, accompanied by a
woman resembling the girlfriend depicted in his social media photographs. 	Id. at 28–29, 32.
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 2 of 6

3
Detective Luna also observed two car seats with the couple. Id. at 29. Based on the individual’s
resemblance to Mr. Trujillo’s inmate photographs and social media images, officers arrested Mr.
Trujillo outside the residence. Id. at 28–29.
In the evening of October 29, state law enforcement officers obtained state magistrate court
search warrants “for the residence and the vehicles at the residence.” Doc. 57 at 4. During the
search of a Ford truck, investigators recovered a black Hi-Point .45-caliber pistol consistent with
the weapon depicted in the surveillance footage. Id. at 4–5. A search of the residence yielded a
broken black cash register, one black glove, one white glove, black masks, and approximately $75
in cash. 	Id. at 5. 	Officers arrested Mr. Trujillo, but the state later dismissed the charges and
released him. Id. Mr. Trujillo was later rearrested pursuant to a federal criminal complaint. Id.
II. 	Standards of Review
A. 	Motion to Suppress
“The proponent of a motion to suppress bears the burden of proof.” 	United States v.
Clarkson, 551 F.3d 1196, 1200 (10th Cir. 2009). However, the burden shifts to the United States
to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were
not violated. United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164, 177 (1974) (concluding the United States
“sustained its burden of proving by the preponderance of the evidence that” search did not violate
Fourth Amendment).
“Judging the credibility of the witnesses, determining the weight to be given to evidence,
and drawing reasonable inferences and conclusions from the evidence are within the province of
the district court.” 	United States v. Hunnicutt, 135 F.3d 1345, 1348 (10th Cir. 1998). 	Factors
beyond a witness’s demeanor and tone of voice may weigh in a judge’s decision to find that
witness’s testimony credible, including “[d]ocuments or objective evidence [that] may contradict
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 3 of 6

4
the witness’ story; or the story itself may be so internally inconsistent or implausible on its face
that a reasonable factfinder would not credit it.” 	Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, N.C., 470
U.S. 564, 575 (1985).
B. 	Probable Cause
“A police officer violates an arrestee’s clearly established Fourth Amendment right to be
free of unreasonable seizure if the officer makes a warrantless arrest without probable cause.”
Olsen v. Layton Hills Mall, 312 F.3d 1304, 1312 (10th Cir. 2002). “[T]he Constitution permits
an officer to arrest a suspect without a warrant if there is probable cause to believe that the suspect
has committed or is committing an offense.” 	Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31, 36 (1979).
“Probable cause exists if facts and circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge and of
which he or she had reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient to lead a prudent person to
believe that the arrestee has committed or is committing an offense.” 	Keylon v. City of
Albuquerque, 535 F.3d 1210, 1216 (10th Cir. 2008). “Although it is not necessary that the officer
possess knowledge of facts sufficient to establish guilt...mere suspicion is insufficient to establish
probable cause.” United States v. Maher, 919 F.2d 1482, 1485 (10th Cir. 1990). “[P]robable cause
must be evaluated in light of circumstances as they would have appeared to a prudent, cautious,
trained police officer.” Id.
III. 	Discussion
The officers here had probable cause to arrest Mr. Trujillo on October 29, 2024. Detective
Luna had reasonably trustworthy information that Mr. Trujillo matched the description of the
suspect involved in the previous evening’s robbery. Specifically, Mr. Trujillo shares the suspect’s
general physical characteristics and bears multiple distinctive tattoos visible in the surveillance
footage, including a “5” tattoo on the back of his neck and tattoos above his right eyebrow and
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 4 of 6

5
along his hairline. In his social media posts, Mr. Trujillo wore a gray hoodie with two strings and
an emblem on the left chest consistent with the suspect’s clothing. 	The evening of the arrest,
Detective Luna identified Mr. Trujillo from his physical appearance and corroborating details from
Mr. Trujillo’s social media account, the presence of two car seats and the woman accompanying
him. Viewed from the perspective of a prudent, trained officer, these facts provided the DASO
officers with probable cause to arrest Mr. Trujillo. See, e.g., United States v. Klein, 93 F.3d 698,
701 (10th Cir. 1996) (probable cause where arrestee matched a suspect’s description, including
appearance, clothing, and residence); United States v. Martin, 2009 WL 103491, at *3 (D. Kan.),
aff'd, 613 F.3d 1295 (10th Cir. 2010) (same where officers recognized the arrestee and his
girlfriend, based on their clothing and appearance). The Government has therefore met its burden
of demonstrating, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it did not violate Mr. Trujillo’s Fourth
Amendment rights. Matlock, 415 U.S. at 177 (1974).
Defendant’s challenge to the timing of probable cause fails. 	Defendant argues that the
Government “fails to specify when probable cause was developed” and “does not set out which
officer learned about evidence leading to probable cause to arrest without a warrant.” Doc. 58 at
1. 	Detective Luna, however, testified repeatedly that he reviewed and compared the security
footage with inmate photographs and Mr. Trujillo’s social media posts on the morning before the
arrest. See Draft Tr. at 18, 22, 32. Based on the consistency of that testimony, Detective Luna’s
demeanor and tone while testifying, and Defendant’s failure to rebut it, the Court finds Detective
Luna’s testimony credible. 	Anderson, 470 U.S. at 575. 	Detective Luna reviewed the security
footage, inmate photographs, and Mr. Trujillo’s social media on the morning of October 29 and
therefore had probable cause to arrest Mr. Trujillo that evening. See Draft Tr. 39–40.
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 5 of 6

6
IV. 	Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that DASO officers had probable cause to
arrest Mr. Trujillo on October 29, 2024. 	Defendant’s motion to suppress fails because it rests
solely on that challenge. The Court declines to suppress the evidence obtained from the subsequent
searches of Defendant’s residence and vehicle. 	Defendant’s Motion to Suppress, Doc. 56, is
DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
• 	Please note that this document has been
electronically filed. To verify its authenticity,
please refer to the Digital File Stamp on the NEF
(Notice of Electronic Filing) accompanying this
document. Electronically filed documents can be
found on the court’s PACER public access system.
Case 2:25-cr-00549-KG Document 67 Filed 02/10/26 Page 6 of 6