Page 32 - 2018 sept oct journal_PJ (1)_Neat
P. 32
SEARCH & SEIZURE – CONSENT FOR policy so that if the vehicle is seized carrying
VEHICLE SEARCH contraband, “the [smuggling] organization itself
does not lose out on money by buying a six month
Defendant-Appellant Juan Perales appeals the or year long (sic) insurance policy.”
district court’s denial of his motion to suppress
several bundles of cocaine discovered and seized After receiving Perales’s identification and
after he consented to the search of his vehicle. insurance paperwork, Agent Tamez asked Perales
Because we conclude the district court did not “how he was doing,” and asked him to “exit the
clearly err in finding that Perales’s consent to the vehicle and step to the rear.” Perales complied,
search was voluntary, we AFFIRM. and Agent Tamez “asked him to sit inside the front
seat of [the] patrol unit.” Perales again complied.
Agent Michael Tamez of the Kingsville Agent Tamez climbed into the driver’s seat of the
Specialized Crimes and Narcotics Task Force patrol unit, explained the traffic violation to
observed a Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck with Perales, and told Perales that he was going to
a non-functioning brake light; a computer check issue him a warning. Agent Tamez began
of the vehicle’s license plate indicated that the preparing the warning, which he testified required
truck might not be insured. Because both the that he both verify and input information into
faulty brake light and driving without valid three different computer systems using three
liability insurance are violations of the Texas different screens. While preparing the warning,
Transportation Code, Agent Tamez initiated a Agent Tamez noticed that the name and address
traffic stop. listed on the vehicle registration differed from that
included on Perales’s driver’s license. Agent
1 Agent Tamez asked Perales, who was the sole Tamez then asked Perales a series of questions
occupant of the truck, for his identification and about several subjects, including how long
proof of liability insurance. Perales provided his Perales had owned the truck, where he was
identification, but could not readily locate his traveling to and from, and the purpose for his trip.
insurance documentation. According to Agent Perales responded that he owned the truck and
Tamez, “[Perales] looked underneath the seat. He had purchased it three months prior, and that he
looked near the left door panel . . . and eventually was traveling to Houston from Brownsville to
he went to the glove compartment. And the find a job. Although Agent Tamez observed that
documentation was inside the glove Perales was not nervous when answering his
compartment,” which was completely empty questions, Agent Tamez testified that Perales gave
except for the insurance documents. Agent Tamez inconsistent or deceptive answers to his questions.
observed that the insurance policy had been Agent Tamez also drew suspicion from the make
purchased the day before the traffic stop and was and model of Perales’s vehicle, which, in his
only good for thirty days. At the suppression experience and training, was commonly used by
hearing, Agent Tamez testified that, in his drug smugglers to hide drugs. Agent Tamez asked
experience as a drug interdiction officer, it was Perales whether the truck contained any drugs or
common in instances of drug trafficking for the weapons, and Perales responded it did not.
driver of the vehicle to be unfamiliar with the
location of insurance documents and for the Based on his interaction with Perales, Agent
interior of the vehicle to lack signs of Tamez asked for consent to search the vehicle.
personalization. It was also common for Perales offered consent, and Agent Tamez began
smugglers to get a 30-day liability insurance searching the vehicle. At the time of the request,
28 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • 866-997-8282 Texas Police Journal
