United States v. Calderon-Flores
This text of 53 F. App'x 473 (United States v. Calderon-Flores) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Appellant Fernando Calderon-Flores (“Calderon-Flores”) appeals the district court’s denial of his motions to suppress evidence obtained during and after a traffic stop. Because we find that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to justify the initial stop, we reverse.
The district court’s finding that the officer had reasonable suspicion to justify the stop was clearly erroneous. The objective facts of the record establish that no officer could have had a reasonable suspicion that Calderon-Flores had violated a traffic law. This court has carefully reviewed the videotape of the events preceding the stop. The pass and lane change into the slow lane was made on a clear day with light traffic. Calderon-Flores never exceeded the speed limit, and the pick-up truck he passed never slowed when Calderon-Flores changed lanes. We therefore conclude that the traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Mariscal, 285 F.3d 1127, 1133 (9th Cir. 2002).
The district court erred in denying Calderon-Flores’s motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop. We therefore REVERSE and REMAND.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
53 F. App'x 473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-calderon-flores-ca9-2002.