Page 31 - TPA Journal March April 2025
P. 31
Conclusion Cordova thereafter pleaded guilty to illegal reen-
For exigent circumstances to justify a warrantless try under 8 U.S.C. Section 1326, reserving his
seizure of personal property, such as a cell phone, right to challenge the district court’s denial of his
the record must show that law enforcement offi- motion to suppress.
cers reasonably believed that evidence would be The suppression hearing produced the following
imminently destroyed if they waited to obtain a facts. Based on information from other sources
warrant to seize the property. Affirmative conduct reporting multiple undocumented immigrants
by the suspect is not required, but it is one way the gathering at the OYO Hotel, six Border Patrol
record may show that the potential destruction agents went to the hotel. Two agents entered the
was imminent. We remand for the court of appeals OYO Hotel’s office and spoke to the desk atten-
to reconsider the arguments of the parties regard- dant before ultimately speaking with the hotel’s
ing whether exigentcircumstances existed to justi- owner and manager, Yogesh Patel. An agent
fy the warrantless seizure of Appellant’s cell explained to Patel why the agents were there and
phone in this case and whether the officer’s con- asked for details regarding Room 115, where it
duct in seizing the property to obtain a warrant was believed the undocumented immigrants were
was reasonable under those circumstances. residing. This agent did not ask Patel to open the
Igboji v. State, Tex.Crim. App. No. PD-0936-20, door to Room 115, but Patel offered regardless. In
March 8, 2023. response, the agent told Patel “no, [and] that [he]
**************************************** needed to go speak with [his] supervisor first.”
**************** The two agents then left the office and returned to
the other agents in the parking lot outside of
SEARCH & SEIZURE private search Room 115.
Outside Room 115, the agents attempted to knock
Santiago Cordova-Espinoza appeals the district on the door four or five times, but the occupants
court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence did not open the door. Patel then approached an
obtained by federal agents after a hotel manager agent in the parking lot and asked him if the
opened the door to a room containing Cordova. agents “wanted in the room.” This agent respond-
The district court properly found that this search ed: “Well, we’ve attempted a knock and talk, but
was a private search. As private searches do not nobody has answered. Outside of that, there is
implicate the Fourth Amendment, the district court nothing we can do without a warrant.” The agent
correctly denied Cordova’s motion to suppress “explained to [Patel] that the occupants, whoever
evidence obtained from the search in question. We has rented the room, have a reasonable expecta-
therefore AFFIRM. tion of privacy from the government.” The agent
Santiago Cordova-Espinoza (“Cordova”), a was confident he had told Patel that he needed
Mexican citizen, entered the United States without either consent or a warrant to open the door, but
authorization. He was found at the OYO Hotel in he was unsure whether he clarified that he needed
Alpine, Texas, when the hotel’s manager opened the occupants’ consent or Patel’s consent. Then,
the door to Cordova’s room in front of Department according to the agent, “in the middle of this con-
of Homeland Security (“DHS”) agents. Cordova versation . . . [Patel] just walked past me and basi-
was charged with illegal reentry under 8 U.S.C. cally left me standing there, opened the door [to
Section 1326. He then moved to suppress the Room 115], turned around, and walked away
fruits of the hotel-room search, arguing that the leaving the door wide open exposing . . . two indi-
hotel manager was acting as a Government agent viduals in the room.”
and that the Government lacked a warrant that Patel described his opening the door in some
authorized the search. The district court held a detail. He explained that he saw “that [the agents]
suppression hearing and denied the motion. were struggling. So [Patel had] the right to open
Mar-Apr 2025 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 27
