United States v. Quintana
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 22404
| 8th Cir. | 2010Background
- Diaz-Quintana pleaded guilty to re-entry by a deported alien following an aggravated felony conviction.
- Stopped for speeding in North Dakota; admitted identity as Diaz-Quintana but lacked immigration documents.
- Border Patrol and state trooper sought immigration status information; initial record checks yielded no immigration history.
- A Border Patrol agent inferred Diaz-Quintana was deportable after matching fingerprint data with a record tied to prior removals.
- Diaz-Quintana was taken into custody for administrative deportation proceedings; Miranda rights were provided and waived.
- District court denied suppression; on appeal, Diaz-Quintana challenges prolonged detention post-stop as Fourth Amendment violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the prolonged immigration-status inquiry during a lawful traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment. | Diaz-Quintana argues detention exceeded permissible scope and duration. | Government contends administrative arrest for deportation was valid and lawful. | Detention upheld; administrative arrest supported by probable cause. |
| Whether Agent Bane had probable cause to take Diaz-Quintana into administrative custody. | Insufficient basis to arrest without warrant during stop. | Probable cause existed from lack of immigration history and Diaz-Quintana's statements. | Yes, probable cause existed to arrest for deportation under § 1357(a)(2) and 8 C.F.R. § 287.8. |
| Whether the district court abused its discretion by not holding an evidentiary hearing on Agent Bane's affidavit. | Plain error for failing to hold a hearing to challenge factual averments. | No error; the facts were undisputed and affidavits supported detention. | No abuse; no plain error in relying on the affidavit. |
| Whether Diaz-Quintana's extended administrative detention followed arrest complied with Fourth Amendment and related case law. | Detention resembles custodial arrest without probable cause. | Detention is a constitutionally valid aspect of deportation proceedings. | Detention within 48-hour framework and during deportation proceedings is permissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Salazar, 454 F.3d 843 (8th Cir. 2006) (review of suppression issues de novo)
- Torres-Lona, 491 F.3d 750 (8th Cir. 2007) (case handling deportation arrests; probable cause considerations)
- Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984) (civil deportation proceedings; distinction from criminal punishment)
- Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510 (2003) (detention in deportation proceedings; validity of confinement)
- Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 177 (2004) (Terry stop principle; limits on prolonged detention)
- Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975) (use of immigration status in seizures; probable cause standard)
- Ojeda-Vinales v. INS, 523 F.2d 286 (2d Cir. 1975) (agency procedures for arrests without warrants)
- Tejeda-Mata v. INS, 626 F.2d 721 (9th Cir. 1980) (probable cause in immigration detention contexts)
- Babula v. INS, 665 F.2d 293 (3d Cir. 1981) (probable cause required for warrantless arrests of aliens)
- Au Yi Lau v. INS, 445 F.2d 217 (D.C. Cir. 1971) (scope of authority for immigration investigations)