USA v. Rafael Partida-Zaragoza


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-41549 Affirmed] Judge: PEH, Judge: EHJ, Judge: JES. Mandate issue date is 12/21/2017 for Appellant Rafael Partida-Zaragoza [16-41549]

Download PDF
Case: 16-41549 Document: 00514253224 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/29/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-41549 Summary Calendar FILED November 29, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAFAEL PARTIDA-ZARAGOZA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:16-CR-95-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Rafael Partida-Zaragoza pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to conspiring to harbor an undocumented alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324. Partida-Zaragoza’s guilty plea was conditional under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(a)(2), and he reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress the evidence acquired during a search of a house in Laredo, Texas, that resulted in his arrest. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 16-41549 Document: 00514253224 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/29/2017 No. 16-41549 Nothing materially distinguishes Partida-Zaragoza’s case from that of his codefendant, Everardo Rodriguez-Mendoza. We thus conclude that Partida-Zaragoza lacked standing to raise a Fourth Amendment challenge to the search. See United States v. Rodriguez-Mendoza, 697 F. App’x 353 (5th Cir. 2017); see also United States v. Briones-Garza, 680 F.2d 417 (5th Cir. 1982) (involving similar facts and holding that standing was lacking). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?