United States v. Eleuterio Murillo-Salgado
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6324
| 8th Cir. | 2017Background
- State trooper Larry Allen stopped a Nissan truck for speeding; occupants were driver Ramon Arredondo and passenger Eleuterio Murillo-Salgado (Salgado).
- During a ~23-minute stop Allen questioned both men, ran identity and warrant checks, and noted inconsistencies about the rental agreement, travel plans, and the amount of wiring and tools observed.
- Arredondo consented to a vehicle search; while searching the passenger compartment officers observed an air-compressor tank with fresh paint, jagged welds, and a non-hollow sound on tapping.
- Officers removed a petcock, probed the tank, and recovered duct-taped packages of cocaine; both occupants were arrested and Salgado moved to suppress.
- The magistrate judge and district court denied suppression; Salgado pleaded guilty conditionally and was sentenced to 63 months with a special condition ordering removal; the government conceded the removal order exceeded the court’s authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged in violation of Rodriguez | Salgado: officer prolonged stop by asking investigatory, off-topic questions without reasonable suspicion, extending seizure beyond traffic tasks | Government: questioning and checks were routine or produced reasonable suspicion as circumstances unfolded, so extension was justified | Court: Stop was not impermissibly prolonged; officer developed reasonable suspicion during routine processing and Rodriguez does not mandate suppression under these facts |
| Whether consent to search the truck validated search of the air compressor | Salgado: Arredondo disclaimed ownership of tools/compressor, so his consent did not cover the compressor | Government: consent allowed search of passenger compartment; observations during consensual search produced probable cause to search compressor under automobile exception | Held: Consent to search vehicle was valid; probable cause supported searching the compressor under the automobile exception |
| Whether the single-purpose-container or plain-view doctrines justified opening the compressor without a warrant | Salgado: compressor not subject to single-purpose-container rule; search required warrant | Government: compressor’s outward signs (paint, welds, odor) and officers’ training gave probable cause; single-purpose/container and plain-view alternative arguments support search | Held: Court declined to rely on single-purpose rule but held search lawful under automobile exception based on probable cause arising during consensual search |
| Whether district court could order automatic removal as a supervised-release condition | Salgado: removal as a special condition exceeded district court authority under § 3583(d) | Government: (conceded) court lacked authority without immigration request/hearing | Held: Court agreed the order exceeded authority and amended condition to require surrender to immigration officials for removal proceedings rather than ordering deportation |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Banks, 514 F.3d 769 (8th Cir.) (discusses single‑purpose‑container expectation of privacy)
- United States v. Peralez, 526 F.3d 1115 (8th Cir. 2008) (limits on extending traffic stops; blended questioning may unlawfully prolong stop)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015) (officer may not prolong traffic stop beyond completion of tasks without reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982) (automobile exception: probable cause justifies search of any part of vehicle that may conceal contraband)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (2011) (evidence need not be suppressed when search was conducted in objectively reasonable reliance on binding precedent)
- Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (2013) (standard for probable cause: facts warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe contraband present)
- United States v. Wells, 347 F.3d 280 (8th Cir.) (automobile exception and scope of vehicle searches)