United States v. Rufino Valdes-Vega, 685 F.3d 1138

Valdes-Vega challenges Border Patrol stop 70 miles north of the border as Fourth Amendment violation; cocaine (7.991 kg) found in his truck following the stop.
Agents Lopez and Hays observed Valdes-Vega speeding and erratic driving with Baja California plates; Lopez requested assistance from Hays.
Hays tracked the truck toward Temecula; the Temecula Checkpoint was non-operational when the truck passed.
Valdes-Vega consented to a search of the truck, yielding approximately 7.991 kilograms of cocaine.
District court denied suppression, finding the totality of circumstances supported reasonable suspicion; the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding the stop unlawful and remanding.
Dissent argues the district court properly applied totality of the circumstances and would affirm suppression.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there reasonable suspicion to stop Valdes-Vega?	Valdes-Vega	Valdes-Vega	No; stop unlawful; totality insufficient
Did proximity to the border render the stop reasonable?	Valdes-Vega	Valdes-Vega	No; proximity 70 miles from border not probative
Did driver behavior and vehicle characteristics justify the stop?	Valdes-Vega	Valdes-Vega	No; facts not highly probative; no particularized suspicion

United States v. Arvizu, 534 F.3d 266 (9th Cir. 2002) (totality of the circumstances standard for reasonable suspicion)
Montero-Camargo, 208 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc; requirement of particularized suspicion)
Berber-Tinoco, 510 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2007) (limits on profiling in border stops; totality analysis)
Sigmond-Ballesteros, 285 F.3d 1117 (9th Cir. 2002) (limits of generalized profiles; factors require scrutiny)
Olivares-Pacheco, 633 F.3d 399 (5th Cir. 2011) (distance from border affects probative value of border-related factors)
Diaz-Juarez, 299 F.3d 1138 (9th Cir. 2002) (limits on using driver’s reaction/eye contact as sole basis for suspicion)