Verified Document

Case Brief For U.S. V. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 2001  Research Paper

Reasonable Suspicion and 4th Amendment Law in U.S. v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2001) Title and Citation: U.S. v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2001)

Type of Action: Review by the U.S. Supreme Court of a ruling made by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which held that evidence should be suppressed as a result of a violation of the Fourth Amendment right to privacy and protection from unwarranted and unreasonable search and seizure. The federal government sought to overturn the motion to suppress that was upheld by the Ninth Circuit.

Facts of the Case: On a January afternoon in 1998 Border Patrol agent Clinton Stoddard was manning a checkpoint on U.S. Highway 191, located north of Douglas, Arizona. At approximately 2:15 P.M. A motion sensor was tripped and Stoddard was notified that a vehicle was traversing an infrequently travelled road -- evidence used by Border Patrol agents to detect possible cases of drug or human smuggling from the nearby American/Mexican border. Despite this occurring at the time agents were supposed switch shifts, Stoddard elected to investigate further.

After reaching the vehicle which tripped the sensor, Stoddard discovered it to be a minivan -- yet another indicator of smuggling activity. According to Stoddard's report, the minivan's driver -- Ralph Arvizu -- began acting suspiciously when he saw Stoddard approach, averting eye contact...

A number of other visual cues suggested to Stoddard that Arvizu was engaged in criminal activity, including children sitting in the backseat with their knees elevated, as if something large and bulky was concealed in the area beneath their seats, and the children's peculiar waving -- which Stoddard believed to be the product of "coaching" by Arvizu.
Finally, a check of Arvizu's vehicle registration showed it to be registered to an address in Douglas which was widely known to authorities as a haven of illicit activity and drug sales. Based on this combination of evidentiary factors Stoddard asked for permission to search the vehicle, ultimately discovering nearly 119 pounds of marijuana concealed within the vehicle.

Arvizu was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in district court, and in federal court he petitioned to suppress the marijuana as evidence. Arvizu's argument held that Stoddard lacked the reasonable suspicion he needed by virtue of the Fourth Amendment to initiate a traffic stop. Citing the multitude of evidentiary facts provided by Stoddard, as well as the unnecessarily circuitous route Arvizu was driving from Douglas to Tucson, the district court denied Arvizu's motion to suppress the marijuana as evidence.

Arvizu then brought his appeal to the Ninth Circuit, which analyzed each of the 10 factors used by the district court in its ruling on an isolated basis. In doing so, the Ninth Circuit ruled that seven of the 10 factors were suggestive of justifiable explanation, and thus had little to no bearing on the reasonable-suspicion examination. According to the Ninth…

Sources used in this document:
References

U.S. v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2001)

U.S. Const. amend. IV
Cite this Document:
Copy Bibliography Citation

Related Documents

Legal Briefs Case Briefs Cook's
Words: 5126 Length: 19 Document Type: Term Paper

Issues Presented or Questions of Law: 1) Did the SBL agreement constitute the contract between the parties? 2) Was Plaintiffs' case barred by the parole evidence rule? 3) Should the trial court have sustained Defendants' demurrer to Plaintiffs' case? Holding / Rule of Law: 1) The SBL agreement did not constitute the contract between the parties. The contracts were formed when Plaintiffs accepted Defendants offer and tendered their consideration. Therefore, the SBL agreement and addendum

Legal Brief: Hotjox Magazine Facts: Mark Studley
Words: 1257 Length: 3 Document Type: Essay

Legal Brief: Hotjox Magazine Facts: Mark Studley (Studley), an Olympic swimmer, was featured on the cover of Hotjox magazine, a magazine targeted primarily at gay males. The picture was in the public domain. The magazine cover had the headline "Olympic Hunks Exposed" and said, "12 Sizzling Centerfolds Ready to Score with You," "Holy Speedo! Hot Athletic Buns!" And "Mark Studley, Olympic 2000's Best Body." The only image of Studley inside the

Legal Briefs Title and Citation: Suggs V.
Words: 563 Length: 2 Document Type: Case Study

Legal Briefs Title and Citation: Suggs v. Norris. No. 364 S.E. 2nd 159. Court of Appeals North Carolina. 2 February 1988 Type of Action: Civil and Contractual Facts of the Case: Darlene Suggs cohabited with Norris, but remained unmarried. During their time together she worked with him as a partner in his produce business and, according to witnesses, was quite instrumental in the success of said business. Suggs also took care of Norris

Legal Brief: Anthony Labriola V. Pollard Group
Words: 448 Length: 2 Document Type: Research Paper

Legal Brief: Anthony Labriola v. Pollard Group Anthony Alan Labriola v. Pollard Group, Inc., WA Supreme Court, 2004, No. 74002-0 Whether a 2002 noncompete agreement negotiated after the employee had been hired and without independent consideration is enforceable. SUBSTANTIVE FACTS: Five years after beginning employment as a sales person the employer required the employee sign a noncompete agreement in 2002. In exchange the employee was allowed to remain employed. After the noncompete agreement was signed

Legal Brief the Author Preparing This Brief
Words: 1426 Length: 4 Document Type: Essay

Legal Brief The author preparing this brief is asked to defend against the banning of a book on the grounds that it is obscene and thus it should be barred from sale and distribution in the public sphere. The laws and standards surrounding obscenity are vague, subjective and impossible to reliably and consistently enforce in a manner that is even-handed and objective. As such, the banning of a book, movie or

Legal Briefs Abstract/Scenario for the
Words: 1316 Length: 5 Document Type: Term Paper

When neither elected to do so, however, there was a violation of the New York Penal Code, leading to the consideration of their guilt or innocence. Implications Under Article 20 of New York Penal Law While the condemnation of a victim is not a viable defense, the implications for Bluto and his obligations under Article 20 deserves exploration. Just as Duty of Retreat applied to Popeye and Olive, it likewise applied

Sign Up for Unlimited Study Help

Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.

Get Started Now