United States v. Elizandro Bravo Garcia

592 F.2d 259, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 15777
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 30, 1979
Docket78-5485
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 592 F.2d 259 (United States v. Elizandro Bravo Garcia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Elizandro Bravo Garcia, 592 F.2d 259, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 15777 (5th Cir. 1979).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Garcia was stopped at the Sari-ta, Texas border checkpoint by a border patrol agent. While questioning Garcia about his citizenship, the agent thought he smelled marijuana. The agent asked Garcia to open the trunk of the car and found marijuana inside it.

Garcia argues on appeal that the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress the marijuana as illegally seized evidence. Garcia concedes that Sarita is the functional equivalent of a border, as held in United States v. Reyna, 572 F.2d 515 (5th Cir. 1978). See Moreno v. United States, 579 F.2d 371 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 99 S.Ct. 1217, 59 L.Ed.2d 456 (1979). However, Garcia contends that a border search can be justified only on the basis of a “reasonable suspicion” of illegal activity. He argues that the border agent did not have a reasonable suspicion when he *260 opened Garcia’s car door and projected his body “halfway into the car” to question Garcia.

However, we read the cases in this circuit to say that probable cause, or even reasonable or articulable suspicion is not necessary at the functional equivalent of a border for the agent to conduct the preliminary search of leaning into a car. United States v. Moreno, supra, United States v. Chaplinski, 579 F.2d 373 (5th Cir. 1978), United States v. Ivey, 546 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1977). If reasonable suspicion was necessary for the more intrusive search of the trunk, it was supplied by the smell of the marijuana. United States v. Arrasmith, 557 F.2d 1093, 1094 (5th Cir. 1977).

Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Otkins v. Gilboy
Fifth Circuit, 2023
United States v. Conley
Fifth Circuit, 2023
United States v. Rasheen Jahmal Smith
481 F. App'x 540 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
Jeffrey A. Bryan v. Brandon Spillman
217 F. App'x 882 (Eleventh Circuit, 2007)
United States v. Oyarzun
582 F. Supp. 121 (W.D. Texas, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
592 F.2d 259, 1979 U.S. App. LEXIS 15777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-elizandro-bravo-garcia-ca5-1979.