88 F. App'x 709

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leon Dashann BRATCHER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-50499.

Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Feb. 13, 2004.

Mark Randolph Stelmach, Assistant US Attorney, Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant US Attorney, US Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Vincent Dennis Callahan, III, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JONES, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.*

Leon Bratcher challenges the district court’s ruling on his motion to suppress evidence in his appeal of count one of his jury conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Bratcher argues that a police officer’s initial stop of his vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment.

Suppression hearing testimony indicates that a police officer stopped Bratcher’s vehicle because Bratcher failed to use a turn signal when pulling out of a parking lot onto a street. Texas Transportation *710Code section 545.104 requires a driver to use a turn signal “to indicate an intention to turn, change lanes, or start from a parked position.” Id.; see Krug v. State, 86 S.W.3d 764, 766 (Tex.App.2001) (“[b]y its plain language, Section 545.104 applies whenever the driver has an ‘intention to turn’ ”). Because the officer had probable cause to believe that a traffic violation had occurred, the decision to stop the vehicle was reasonable and did not violate the Fourth Amendment. See Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 810, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996). The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.

United States v. Bratcher
88 F. App'x 709

Case Details

Name
United States v. Bratcher
Decision Date
Feb 13, 2004
Citations

88 F. App'x 709

Jurisdiction
United States

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!