USA v. Rafael Partida-Zaragoza
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED.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]
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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?