United States v. Jeffrey Freeman
914 F.3d 337
| 5th Cir. | 2019Background
- Border Patrol Agent Carlos Perez observed Jeffrey Freeman's pickup turn from US-59 onto FM 2050, a known smuggling route that allows drivers to avoid the Freer immigration checkpoint. Freeman was first observed within 50 miles of the border and stopped roughly 7.6–9 miles from the checkpoint several minutes after being called out.
- Perez and a partner pursued the truck, saw it kick up dust and observed Freeman glance repeatedly toward his side mirror; Perez estimated high speeds but later admitted uncertainty whether Freeman was actually speeding. The road was under construction.
- A license-plate check showed the vehicle had temporary (paper) plates and was registered to an individual in Houston rather than a local company; Perez testified temporary plates can be used by smugglers and that out-of-area registration on FM 2050 is uncommon.
- After the stop agents found a passenger (Rivera-Quintero) without legal status; she later testified Freeman drove normally and only veered when stopped.
- The magistrate judge recommended denying suppression for the February 13 stop; the district court independently reviewed the record, credited the defendant’s objections, and granted suppression for that stop. The Government appealed the district court’s ruling as to the February 13 stop; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Government's Argument | Freeman's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Border Patrol had reasonable suspicion to make a roving-patrol stop on FM 2050 | Agent Perez had reasonable suspicion based on proximity to border, FM 2050's smuggling reputation, vehicle characteristics (paper plate, out-of-area registration), driver behavior, and agent experience | The facts (near-50-mile proximity, common vehicle type, uncertain speeding, passenger unseen pre-stop, plate check showing current registration) do not, in totality, support reasonable suspicion | No reasonable suspicion; suppression affirmed for the February 13 stop |
| Proper weight to give agent experience and inferences drawn from observations | Perez’s 8+ years at the checkpoint and patrol experience support giving his inferences weight | Perez’s limited success rate on FM 2050 stops and limited direct experience detecting smuggling reduce the probative weight of his inferences | Court gave limited weight to Perez’s detecting-experience; overall inferences insufficient to supply reasonable suspicion |
| Whether the district court erred by considering Perez’s admission that agents stop every vehicle turning onto FM 2050 (Whren concern about officer motive) | Objective facts still must be assessed; Whren permits ignoring subjective motive if objective justification exists | District court properly considered the practice among other facts in its totality review | Whren does not mandate reversal where the totality of objective facts fail to supply reasonable suspicion; district court’s consideration was not reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (totality-of-circumstances and deference to officers' experience in reasonable-suspicion analysis)
- United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975) (lists factors for border-area reasonable-suspicion stops)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (officer's subjective intent irrelevant if objective justification exists)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (review standards: factual findings for clear error, legal conclusions de novo)
- United States v. Rangel-Portillo, 586 F.3d 376 (5th Cir. 2009) (applications of Brignoni-Ponce; caution about relying solely on border-area and smuggling-route reputation)
- United States v. Cervantes, 797 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2015) (summarizes Brignoni-Ponce factors and emphasizes totality review)
- United States v. Jacquinot, 258 F.3d 423 (5th Cir. 2001) (proximity-to-border guidance—first observed within 50 miles but stopped beyond 50 miles)
- United States v. Zapata-Ibarra, 212 F.3d 877 (5th Cir. 2000) (road’s reputation as smuggling route contributes to reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976) (permanent checkpoints may operate without individualized suspicion)