IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40089
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BALDEMAR M. GARZA, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. L-97-CR-266-1
- - - - - - - - - -
Januiary 6, 1999
Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Baldemar M. Garza appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion to suppress following his conviction for possession with
intent to distribute marijuana. Garza argues that the reaction
of the canine as the tractor-trailer was driving through the
checkpoint was insufficient to establish probable cause. Garza
did not make this argument in the district court. His argument
was fact-based regarding the credibility of Agent Zelmer’s
testimony that the dog alerted to Garza’s vehicle. Once the dog
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-40089
-2-
positively alerted to the presence of drugs, the agents had
probable cause to search the tractor-trailer and any containers
in it that might contain drugs. See United States v. Ross, 456
U.S. 798, 824-25 (1982); United States v. Seals, 987 F.2d 1102,
1106-07 (5th Cir. 1993); United States v. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d
206, 207 (5th Cir. 1990); and United States v. Hernandez, 976
F.2d 929, 930 (5th Cir. 1992). Garza cites no authority for his
argument that the dog's alert alone was insufficient to establish
probable cause. The district court did not commit plain error in
denying Garza’s motion to suppress and admitting the marijuana
seized during the warrantless search of Garza’s truck at the
permanent border patrol checkpoint. United States v. Calverley,
37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).
AFFIRMED.