Read the following United States Court of Appeals case: United States v. Alcaraz-Arellano, 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006). (https://casetext.com/case/us-v-alcaraz-arellano). Write 500–700 words that

Read the following United States Court of Appeals case: United States v. Alcaraz-Arellano, 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006). (https://casetext.com/case/us-v-alcaraz-arellano). Write 500–700 words that
No. 0 4-3 230 U nit e d S ta te s C ourt o f A ppeals , T e n th C ir c u it U.S. v . Alcaraz-Ar ellano 441 F .3 d 1 252 ( 1 0th C ir. 2 006) D ecid ed M ar 3 0, 2 006 N o. 0 4-3 230. M arc h 3 0, 2 006. H ART Z, C ir c u it J u dge. A ppeal fro m th e U nite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C ourt fo r th e D is tr ic t o f K an sa s, S am A . C ro w , J . * 1253 1253 M arily n M . Tru bey, Assis ta n t Fed era l Public D efe n der (D av id J. Phillip s, Fed era l Public D efe n der, w ith h er o n th e b rie f), T opek a, K S, fo r th e D efe n dan t- A ppella n t. J a m es A . B ro w n, A ssis ta n t U nite d S ta te s A tto rn ey (E ric F . M elg re n , U nite d S ta te s A tto rn ey, w ith h im o n th e brie f), Topek a, K S, fo r th e Pla in tif f – A ppelle e. B efo re H EN RY, M cK AY, an d H ART Z, C ir c u it J u dges. * 1255 1255 O n F eb ru ary 1 1 , 2 003, G era rd o A lc ara z-A re lla n o w as i n dic te d i n t h e U nite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C ourt f o r th e D is tr ic t of K an sa s * 1256 on one co unt of posse ssin g with in te n t to dis tr ib ute th re e k ilo gra m s o f c o cain e a n d o ne c o unt o f p osse ssin g w ith in te n t to d is tr ib ute o ne k ilo gra m o f h ero in . See 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 41(a )(1 ) . H e p le ad ed g uilty to th e se co nd c o unt. B efo re p le ad in g g uilty h e h ad m oved to su ppre ss ev id en ce se iz ed durin g a veh ic le se arc h afte r a tr a ff ic sto p an d, alle g in g se le ctiv e en fo rc em en t (ra cia l pro filin g), had m oved to dis m is s th e in dic tm en t. The dis tr ic t co urt d en ie d b oth m otio ns. M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s p le a a g re em en t p re se rv ed h is rig ht to a p peal th e dis tr ic t c o urt’s r u lin gs o n th e m otio ns, a n d h e n ow ap peals th ose ru lin gs. M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o’s o pen in g brie f als o ra is e d a ch alle n ge to his s e n te n ce, b ut h e la te r file d a p le ad in g w ith th is c o urt ab an donin g th e ch alle n ge. W e ex erc is e ju ris d ic tio n u nder 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 291 a n d a ff ir m . 1256 I. MOTION T O SUPPRESS A. B ack gro u nd O n F eb ru ary 9, 2003, R usse ll C ounty S herif f ‘s D ep uty Kelly Sch neid er, who was driv in g w estb ound o n I-7 0, d ete rm in ed b y ra d ar th at M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o, w ho w as driv in g eastb ound, w as d riv in g 7 7 m ph in a 7 0 m ph zo ne. D ep uty S ch neid er tu rn ed aro und to p urs u e M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s c ar, a g old 2 001 O ld sm obile A le ro . H e pulle d alo ngsid e th e car an d o bse rv ed tw o m en in sid e, b oth o f w hom a p peare d to b e H is p an ic . H e th en d ir e cte d M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o to sto p. M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o b ro ught h is c ar to th e s id e o f th e hig hw ay a t 2 :4 2:2 0 p .m . T he s to p w as r e co rd ed b y a v id eo re co rd er in sid e D ep uty S ch neid er’s p atr o l car. D ep uty S ch neid er e x ite d h is c ar, s to od b eh in d M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s car, an d sig nale d to Mr. A lc ara z-A re lla n o to co m e to him . M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o c o m plie d . W hen D ep uty S ch neid er a sk ed fo r h is lic en se , M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o r e tr ie v ed h is lic en se fro m his car an d gav e it to D ep uty S ch neid er. D ep uty S ch neid er th en a sk ed fo r M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s re g is tr a tio n, a n d M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o ag ain re tu rn ed to h is car, o bta in ed th e re g is tr a tio n, a n d g av e it to h im . D ep uty S ch neid er ex am in ed th e d ocu m en ts , w hic h s h ow ed th at M r. 1 Alc ara z-A re lla n o w as lic en se d to driv e in N ew Y ork a n d h ad p urc h ase d t h e c ar i n C alif o rn ia t h re e d ay s e arlie r. T he a d dre ss f o r M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o on th e re g is tr a tio n w as in C alif o rn ia . In re sp onse to D ep u ty Sch neid er’s questio ns, M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o sa id th at he liv ed in N ew Y ork , had tr a v ele d to C alif o rn ia , h ad sta y ed th ere o ne an d one-h alf d ay s, h ad p urc h ase d th e c ar, a n d w as e n ro ute back to New York . Dep uty Sch neid er o bse rv ed th at M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o ap peare d ex tr e m ely n erv ous. A t 2 :4 4:3 0 p .m . D ep uty S ch neid er r e tu rn ed to h is p atr o l car. A t 2:4 5:0 9 he in v ite d M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o in to th e p atr o l c ar, te llin g h im , ” le t’s g et y ou w here it’s w arm .” D ep uty Sch neid er th en in fo rm ed M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o th at he was w ritin g h im a w arn in g, w hic h w ould n ot c o st h im a n y m oney. W hile he w as w ritin g th e w arn in g tic k et, Dep uty Sch neid er ask ed M r. Alc ara z- A re lla n o w hen h e h ad b ought th e c ar a n d w hat h e did f o r a liv in g. M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o to ld D ep uty S ch neid er, a m ong o th er th in gs, th at h e w ork ed in la n dsc ap in g, b ut h ad n ot w ork ed f o r t w o m onth s. A t 2:4 6:3 8 p.m . D ep uty Sch n eid er ra d io ed th e dis p atc h o pera to r to v erif y M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s l ic en se . T he o pera to r re sp onded w ith th e lic en se in fo rm atio n at 2 :5 2:0 6 p .m . D urin g th at in te rv al D ep uty Sch neid er co ntin ued questio nin g M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o, a sk in g w heth er h e lik ed h is c ar, w heth er th ere w as m uch s n ow in N ew Y ork , w ho his passe n ger w as, w here his passe n ger liv ed , w hat h e ty pic ally d id d urin g th e w in te r sin ce h e had n ot w ork ed fo r a c o uple m onth s, w heth er h e ow ned th e c ar, a n d h ow m uch h e p aid fo r it. M r. * 1257 A lc ara z-A re lla n o s a id t h at h e h ad b ought t h e car f o r $ 4,0 00. 1257 D ep uty S ch neid er g av e M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o th e w arn in g tic k et an d bid him “a d io s” at 2:5 2:4 4 p.m ., 10 m in ute s afte r th e sto p. But as M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o was le av in g th e patr o l car, D ep uty S ch neid er re q ueste d p erm is sio n to a sk a fe w m ore q uestio ns. M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o a g re ed . D ep uty Sch neid er ask ed w heth er he had an y co ntr a b an d in th e car. M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o re p lie d th at h e d id n ot. D ep uty S ch neid er a sk ed to ” lo ok in ” th e car, an d M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o co nse n te d . W hile in sp ecti n g th e tr u nk, D ep uty Sch neid er n otic ed th at its flo or w as g re en ra th er th an g old , w here as, to his know le d ge, th e orig in al u nderc o atin g a lm ost a lw ay s m atc h es th e e x te rio r pain t. H e a ls o n otic ed th at th e c au lk in g a ro und th e flo or w as n ew , t h ic k , a n d w hite , a n d t h at t h e c arp et p ad din g in th e s p are -tir e c o m partm en t w as g lu ed to th e flo or, w here as in m ost cars th e carp et p ad din g c an s im ply b e p ulle d a w ay f r o m t h e f lo or. H e th en c o nducte d a ” fin ger te st” in sid e th e tr u nk, pla cin g o ne h an d o n th e in sid e o f th e tr u nk a n d one h an d u ndern eath th e c ar, a n d ta p pin g o n th e tr u nk to lis te n fo r s ig ns o f a g ap b etw een th e to p an d th e b otto m . H e c o nclu ded th at th ere w as s u ch a g ap a n d e stim ate d it to b e a b out th re e in ch es, in dic atin g a c o nceale d c o m partm en t. H e to ld M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o th at he had fo und a fa ls e c o m partm en t, a n d t h at h e w ou ld t a k e t h e c ar t o t h e sh erif f ‘s dep artm en t to be se arc h ed . The su bse q uen t s e arc h r e v eale d a h id den c o m partm en t co nta in in g th re e kilo gra m s of co cain e an d one kilo gra m o f h ero in . M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o file d a m otio n to su ppre ss th e e v id en ce se iz ed d urin g th e se arc h o f h is c ar, a rg uin g th at th e tr a ff ic sto p its e lf w as ille g al b ecau se he was not sp ee d in g, th at Dep uty S ch neid er’s su bse q uen t dete n tio n of him was ille g al b ecau se its sc o pe an d d ura tio n ex ceed ed w hat w as ju stif ie d b y th e p urp ose o f th e s to p, a n d th at D ep uty S ch neid er did no t hav e re aso nab le s u sp ic io n of crim in al activ ity to ju stif y th e questio nin g durin g th e sto p . In den yin g M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s m otio n to su ppre ss ev id en ce, th e dis tr ic t co urt ru le d th at D ep uty S ch neid er’s s to p o f M r. A lc a ra z-A re lla n o w as v alid b ecau se h e had re aso nab le su sp ic io n th at Mr. Alc ara z- A re lla n o w as sp eed in g, th at D ep uty S ch neid er’s f u rth er d ete n tio n a n d q uestio nin g o f M r. A lc ara z- 2 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) Are lla n o w as ju stif ie d by re a so nab le su sp ic io n, an d th at M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o g av e v alid c o nse n t fo r D ep uty S ch neid er t o s e arc h h is c ar. O n ap peal M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o arg ues th at D ep uty S ch neid er v io la te d t h e F ourth A m en dm en t by ask in g h im q uestio ns u nre la te d to th e in itia l p urp ose o f t h e s to p; t h at D ep u ty S ch neid er d id n ot hav e re aso nab le su sp ic io n to a sk th ese u nre la te d q uestio ns; th at he did not valid ly co nse n t to D ep uty S ch neid er’s c o ntin ued q uestio nin g o f h im a fte r re tu rn in g h is lic en se ; th at h e d id n ot v alid ly c o nse n t to D ep uty S ch neid er’s se arc h o f h is c ar; a n d th at if th e se arc h w as co nse n su al, D ep uty S ch neid er e x ceed ed t h e s c o pe o f c o nse n t. B. Analysis M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o arg ues th at Dep uty S ch neid er’s dete n tio n an d questio nin g of him v io la te d th e Fourth Am en d m en t. The Fourth A m en dm en t p ro te cts th e ” rig ht o f th e p eo ple to b e se cu re in th eir pers o ns, hou se s, pap ers , an d eff e cts , ag ain st unre aso nab le se arc h es an d se iz u re s.” U .S . C onst. A m en d. I V . A tr a ff ic s to p is a F ourth A m en dm en t se iz u re “e v en th ough th e purp ose o f th e sto p is lim ite d an d th e re su ltin g dete n tio n quite brie f.” D ela w are v. P ro use , 4 40 U .S . 648, 653 , 9 9 S .C t. 1391 , 5 9 L .E d.2 d 660 (1 979). A tr a ff ic sto p is perm is sib le under th e F ourth A m en dm en t i f ” th e o ff ic er h as a r e aso nab le a rtic u la b le su sp ic io n th at a *1258 tr a ff ic . . . vio la tio n has occu rre d or is occu rrin g.” U nite d S ta te s v . H unnic u tt, 1 35 F .3 d 1 345, 1 348 ( 1 0th C ir. 1 998). ” W hen r e v ie w in g a d is tr ic t c o urt’s d en ia l o f a m otio n to su ppre ss, w e c o nsid er th e to ta lity o f th e cir c u m sta n ces an d v ie w th e ev id en ce in th e lig ht m ost fa v ora b le to th e g overn m en t.” U nite d S ta te s v . G ord on, 168 F .3 d 1 222, 1 225 (1 0th C ir. 1 999). “W e accep t th e dis tr ic t co urt’s fa ctu al fin din gs u nle ss [th ey ] a re c le arly e rro neo us.” Id . “T he u ltim ate d ete rm in atio n o f r e aso nab le n ess . . . is a q uestio n o f l a w r e v ie w ab le d e n ovo.” Id . 1258 D ep uty S ch neid er’s in itia l sto p of M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o is n ot c h alle n ged o n a p peal; h e o bse rv ed (w ith a r a d ar d ev ic e) M r. A lc a ra z-A re lla n o d riv in g 77 m ph in a 7 0 m ph zo ne. M r. A lc ara z arg ues, h ow ev er, th at th e sto p becam e unla w fu l w hen D ep uty S ch neid er a sk ed h im q uestio ns u nre la te d to t h e p urp ose o f t h e s to p. I n U nite d S ta te s v . H olt, 2 64 F .3 d 1 215, 1 230 (1 0 th C ir. 2 001 ) (e n b an c), w e s ta te d th at th e re aso nab le n ess o f a tr a ff ic s to p dep en ds o n b oth ” th e le n gth o f th e d ete n tio n a n d th e m an ner in w hic h it is carr ie d out.” It is r e aso nab le f o r a n o ff ic er t o a sk q uestio ns a b out t h e m oto ris t’s tr a v el p la n s a n d a u th ority to o pera te th e veh ic le . U nite d S ta te s v . B ra dfo rd , 423 F .3 d 1 1 49, 11 56 (1 0th C ir. 2 00 5). A lth ough H olt h eld th at fu rth er questio n in g is ju stif ia b le only if it is r e aso nab le in re la tio n to th e in itia l p urp ose o f th e tr a ff ic s to p, H olt, 2 64 F .3 d a t 1 228 , th e sc o pe o f th is hold in g has been lim ite d by th e Supre m e Court’s d ecis io n in M ueh le r v . M en a, 544 U .S . 9 3 , 125 S .C t. 1 465 , 1 61 L .E d.2 d 2 99 ( 2 005). In M ueh le r th e S upre m e C ourt u pheld th e p olic e o ff ic ers ‘ q uestio nin g o f M s. I ris M en a, w hom th ey w ere deta in in g w hile th ey ex ecu te d a se arc h w arra n t i n t h e h o use s h e o ccu pie d ; t h e q uestio nin g re la te d to her im mig ra tio n sta tu s, a matte r u nre la te d to th e p urp ose o f th e s e arc h . I d . a t 1 471. T he co urt of ap peals had ru le d th e questio nin g unco nstitu tio nal, ap pare n tly on th e gro und th at “th e o ff ic ers w ere re q uir e d to h av e in dep en den t re aso nab le s u sp ic io n in o rd er to q uestio n M en a . . . bec au se th e questio nin g co n stitu te d a dis c re te F ourth Am en dm en t ev en t.” Id . The Supre m e Court re v ers e d . It sta te d th at “m ere polic e q uestio nin g d o es n ot co nstitu te a se iz u re ” u nder th e Fourth A m en dm en t. I d . (in te rn al quota tio n m ark s om itte d ). “E ven w hen off ic ers hav e no basis fo r su sp ectin g a p artic u la r in div id ual, th ey m ay g en era lly a sk q uestio ns o f t h at i n div id ual; a sk to ex am in e th e in div id ual’s id en tif ic atio n; an d re q uest c o nse n t to s e arc h h is o r h er lu ggag e.” Id . (in te rn al q uota tio n m ark s an d b ra ck ets o m itte d ). A s M s. M en a’s d ete n tio n w as n ot p ro lo nged b y t h e questio nin g, th e questio nin g did not cre ate an ad ditio nal se iz u re . I d . The Court an alo giz ed q uestio nin g d urin g a se arc h to p erfo rm in g a d og sn if f d urin g a tr a ff ic s to p, w hic h d oes n ot v io la te 3 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) th e F ourth A m en dm en t if it d oes n ot e x te n d th e sto p “`b ey ond th e tim e re aso nab ly re q uir e d to c o m ple te [th e sto p’s orig in al purp ose ].'” Id . (q uotin g Illin ois v. C aballe s, 5 43 U .S . 4 05 , 1 25 S .C t. 834, 837 , 1 60 L .E d.2 d 842 (2 005)). T he C ourt c o n clu ded : ” [T ]h e C ourt o f A ppeals d id n ot fin d th at th e q uestio nin g e x te n ded th e tim e M en a w as deta in ed . Thus no ad ditio nal Fourth A m en dm en t ju stif ic atio n fo r in quir in g ab out M en a’s im mig ra tio n sta tu s w as re q uir e d .” Id . at 1 471-7 2. I n lig ht o f M ueh le r, w e h av e h eld th at ” [a ]s lo ng as th e [d ep uty ‘s ] questio nin g did not ex te n d th e le n gth o f th e d ete n tio n, . . . th ere is n o F ourth A m en dm en t is su e w ith re sp ect to th e co nte n t o f t h e q uestio ns.” U nite d S ta te s v . W alla ce, 4 29 F .3 d 9 69, 9 74 ( 1 0th C ir. 2 005). A pply in g th is la w , we fir s t ad dre ss Dep uty S ch neid er’s q uestio nin g o f M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o befo re re tu rn in g h is lic en se . T his q uestio nin g c an b e d iv id ed *1259 in to th re e in te rv als : th e in iti a l en co unte r o uts id e th e c ars , th e tim e d urin g w hic h D ep uty S ch neid er w as w ritin g th e w arn in g tic k et, a n d th e tim e w hile D ep uty S ch neid er w as w aitin g fo r th e d is p atc h o pera to r to v erif y M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s l ic en se . D urin g t h e f ir s t i n te rv al D ep uty S ch neid er a sk ed o nly a f e w q uestio ns a b out tr a v el p la n s a n d v eh ic le o w ners h ip b efo re g oin g to h is p atr o l car to is su e a warn in g. Such lim ite d q uestio nin g is pro per, becau se an off ic er m ay ro utin ely ask ab out tr a v el pla n s an d ow ners h ip d urin g a la w fu l tr a ff ic sto p. S ee B ra dfo rd , 423 F.3 d a t 1 1 56 . 1259 D urin g th e se co nd in te rv al D ep uty Sch neid er q uestio ned M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o in th e p atr o l c ar w hile he w as w ritin g th e w arn in g tic k et. T his q uestio nin g w as n ot lim ite d to tr a v el p la n s an d ow ners h ip of th e veh ic le , but it did not ap pre cia b ly le n gth en th e d ete n tio n an d th ere fo re th e F ourth A m en dm en t re q uir e s n o ju stif ic atio n. See W alla ce, 4 29 F.3 d at 9 74 . A s M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o e n te re d th e p atr o l c ar, D ep uty S ch neid er to ld him th at he w as w ritin g a w arn in g tic k et. D ep uty Sch neid er te stif ie d at th e su ppre ssio n hearin g th at he w as w ritin g th e w arn in g tic k et w hile M r. A lc a ra z-A re lla n o w as in th e p atr o l c ar. W ritin g th e w arn in g tic k et o cc u pie d tw o m in ute s, o ne m in ute a n d 2 9 se co nds o f w hic h w as w hile M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o w as s itti n g in th e p atr o l c ar. E ven if th is ta sk m ig ht hav e been perf o rm ed slig htly fa ste r had D ep uty Sch neid er not been ask in g questio n s, th e tim e in volv ed was not “b ey ond th e tim e r e aso nab ly r e q uir e d to c o m ple te th at [ ta sk ].” C aballe s, 1 25 S .C t. a t 8 37; s e e U nite d S ta te s v. M artin , 422 F .3 d 5 97, 6 01-0 2 (7 th C ir. 2 005) (” A tr a ff ic sto p does not beco m e unre aso nab le m ere ly becau se th e off ic er ask s questio ns u nre la te d to th e in it ia l p urp ose fo r th e sto p, pro vid ed th at th ose questio ns do not unre aso nab ly e x te n d th e a m ou nt o f tim e th at th e su bje ct is d ela y ed .” ); U nite d S ta te s v . C hild s, 2 77 F.3 d 947, 949 (7 th Cir. 20 02) (e n ban c) (” q uestio ns th at do not in cre ase th e le n gth of dete n tio n ( o r t h at e x te n d i t b y o nly a b rie f t im e) d o not mak e th e cu sto dy its e lf unre aso nab le “). T here fo re , t h is q uestio nin g w as l a w fu l. A s fo r th e th ir d in te rv al, th e perio d D ep uty S ch neid er q uestio ned M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o w hile h e w as w aitin g fo r th e ra d io d is p atc h er to v erif y M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o’s lic en se (2 :4 6:3 8 p.m . th ro ugh 2 :5 2:1 6 p .m .) , t h e l ic en se c h eck i ts e lf w as p erm is sib le , s e e H olt, 2 64 F .3 d a t 1 221 ( ” [D ]u rin g a ro utin e tr a ff ic s to p th e o ff ic er m ay a sk to s e e a d riv er’s lic en se an d re g is tr a tio n an d ch eck th at th ey are valid .” ), an d th e questio nin g did not pro lo ng th e d ete n tio n w hile th e lic en se c h eck w as b ein g perfo rm ed . A s a re su lt, th e questio nin g, re g ard le ss o f th e to pic , d id n o t v io la te th e F ourth A m en dm en t. In sh ort, w e re je ct M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s c h alle n ges to th e q uestio nin g b efo re h is lic en se w as r e tu rn ed . T he questio nin g afte r th e re tu rn of th e lic en se , h ow ev er, m ust b e a n aly zed d if f e re n tly b ecau se it d id pro lo ng th e sto p. A fte r D ep uty Sch neid er re tu rn ed th e docu m en ta tio n to M r. Alc ara z- A re lla n o an d sa id “a d io s,” he re q ueste d p erm is sio n fro m M r. A lc ara z -A re lla n o to ask a fe w m ore q uestio ns. M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o a g re ed an d th en co nse n te d to a se arc h of his car. H e 4 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) co nte n ds th at th is questio nin g im perm is sib ly e x te n ded th e tr a ff ic sto p. W e dis a g re e. The ad ditio nal questio nin g co uld be ju stif ie d if th e en co unte r a t th is p oin t w as c o nse n su al, s e e U nite d S ta te s v. E llio tt, 1 07 F.3 d 810, 814 (1 0th C ir. 1 997), o r i f p ro lo ngatio n o f t h e s to p w as s u pporte d b y r e aso nab le s u sp ic io n, W alla ce, 4 29 F .3 d a t 9 74 . B ecau se th e dis tr ic t co urt did not ad dre ss th e possib ility of co nse n t, we co nsid er only r e aso nab le su sp ic io n. R easo nab le su sp ic io n is a “p artic u la riz ed a n d o bje ctiv e b asis fo r su sp ectin g th e pers o n sto pped of crim in al activ ity .” *1260 O rn ela s v . U nite d S ta te s, 5 17 U .S . 6 90, 6 96 , 1 1 6 S .C t. 1657 , 1 34 L.E d.2 d 911 (1 996) (in te rn al q uota tio n mark s om itte d ). It “re p re se n ts a `m in im um l e v el o f o bje ctiv e j u stif ic atio n’ w hic h i s ` c o nsid era b ly le ss th an p ro of o f w ro ngdoin g b y a p re p ondera n ce o f th e e v id en ce.'” U nite d S ta te s v. M en dez, 1 1 8 F.3 d 1426, 1431 (1 0th C ir. 1997) (q uotin g U nite d S ta te s v . S oko lo w , 490 U .S . 1 , 7 , 1 09 S .C t. 1 581 , 1 04 L .E d.2 d 1 (1 98 9).) In our vie w , Dep uty Sch neid er po sse sse d re aso nab le s u sp ic io n. 1260 A lth ough th e dis tr ic t co urt ru le d th at D ep uty S ch neid er had acq uir e d re aso nab le su sp ic io n to d eta in M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o fo r questio nin g at so m e p oin t d urin g th eir c o nvers a tio n in th e p atr o l car, w e need ad dre ss only w heth er th ere w as re aso nab le su sp ic io n when Dep uty Sch neid er re tu rn ed th e lic en se to M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o. B y th at tim e, D ep uty Sch neid er had th e fo llo w in g in fo rm atio n: M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o s a id t h at h e h ad d riv en acro ss th e co untr y fro m N ew York to C alif o rn ia fo r a one-a n d-a -h alf -d ay vis it durin g w hic h h e p urc h ase d a n ot- u nusu al u se d v eh ic le f o r $4,0 00; h e to ld D ep uty S ch neid er th at h e liv ed in N ew Y ork , b ut th e v eh ic le re g is tr a tio n sh ow ed a C alif o rn ia ad dre ss; h e w as u n em plo yed ; an d h e w as ex tr e m ely nerv ous. W e ag re e th at it w as im pla u sib le th at an unem plo yed New York er w ould in nocen tly d riv e to C alif o rn ia fr o m N ew Y ork , v is it t h ere f o r l e ss t h an t w o d ay s, p urc h ase a v eh ic le (g iv in g a Calif o rn ia ad dre ss fo r th e re g is tr a tio n), an d th en driv e back . Dep uty S ch neid er th us h ad r e aso nab le s u sp ic io n to d eta in M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o fo r fu rth er in vestig atio n afte r re tu rn in g his lic en se an d re g is tr a tio n. S ee U nite d S ta te s v . S anto s, 4 03 F .3 d 1 1 20, 1 1 29 ( 1 0th C ir. 20 05) (” Im pla u sib le tr a v el pla n s can co ntr ib ute to re aso nab le su sp ic io n.” ); U nite d S ta te s v . M cR ae, 8 1 F .3 d 1 528, 1 534-3 5 ( 1 0th C ir. 1 996) (a p pare n t co ntr a d ic tio n betw een date s on defe n dan t’s c ar r e n ta l a g re em en t a n d a lle g ed t r a v el p la n s c o n tr ib ute d to r e aso nab le s u sp ic io n); U nite d S ta te s v . K opp, 45 F .3 d 1 450, 1 453-5 4 (1 0th C ir. 1 995) (o ff ic er h ad re aso nab le s u sp ic io n to d eta in m oto ris t in part becau se he “d id not fin d it p la u sib le th at Defe n dan t would driv e fr o m C alif o rn ia to N orth C aro lin a m ere ly to ta k e a v ery d ila p id ate d s o fa t o s o m e f rie n ds” ). F in ally , M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o ch alle n ges D ep uty S ch neid er’s se arc h o f h is c ar. H e a rg ues th at h is c o nse n t w as in valid b ecau se it w as th e f r u it o f a n u nla w fu l dete n tio n. But th is arg um en t fa ils b ecau se w e hav e held th at th e dete n tio n w as la w fu l. H e als o arg ues th at his co nse n t w as in volu nta ry . B ut th e re co rd d o es n ot in dic ate th at h e arg ued v olu nta rin ess in d is tr ic t co urt, ex cep t, p erh ap s, o n th e g ro und th at h e d id n ot a d eq uate ly u nders ta n d E ng lis h , an arg um en t not ra is e d on ap peal. O rd in arily w e d o n ot ad dre ss arg um en ts n ot m ad e b elo w . U nite d S ta te s v. M oore , 2 2 F .3 d 241, 243 n. 3 (1 0th C ir. 1994) (” W e w ill not ad dre ss is su es ra is e d fo r th e fir s t tim e o n a p peal, o n w hic h n o a d eq uate r e co rd w as c re ate d b elo w .” ). T hat pra ctic e is partic u la rly ap pro pria te here , b ecau se h is fa ilu re to ra is e th e arg um en t b elo w dep riv es u s o f a n y fa ct fin din g o n th e m atte r b y th e dis tr ic t co urt. Acco rd in g ly , we will not co nsid er t h e i s su e o f v olu nta rin ess. M r. A lc a ra z-A re lla n o f u rth er a rg ues, h ow ev er, t h at ev en if th e co nse n t w as valid , th e se arc h w as ille g al becau se th e sc o pe of his co nse n t w as ex ceed ed w hen th e car w as tr a n sp orte d to th e sh erif f ‘s d ep artm en t a n d d is m an tle d . I t is n ot c le ar w heth er M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o ra is e d th is is su e in d is tr ic t c o urt. I t a p pears t h at a ll h e a rg ued w as t h at h e c o nse n te d o nly to a m ere p eek in sid e, a n d n ot 5 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) to th e s e arc h c o nducte d w hile th e c ar w as b y th e sid e o f th e h ig hw ay. B ut th e g overn m en t d oes n ot cla im th at th e is su e w as n ot p re se rv ed , s o w e w ill g iv e M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o t h e b en efit o f t h e d oubt an d a d dre ss i t. * 1261 1261 M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o m ay be co rre ct th at his c o nse n t d id n ot e x te n d to tr a n sp ortin g th e c ar to th e sh erif f ‘s d ep artm en t a n d d is m an tlin g it th ere . B ut co nse n t was unnecessa ry becau se th ese a ctio ns w ere su pporte d by pro bab le cau se . A polic e o ff ic er m ay c o nduct a w arr a n tle ss s e arc h o f an au to m obile if th ere is “p ro bab le cau se to b elie v e th at th e veh ic le co nta in s co ntr a b an d or oth er e v id en ce w hic h is su bje ct to se iz u re u nder la w .” U nite d S ta te s v. M erc a do, 307 F.3 d 1 226, 1230 (1 0th C ir. 2 002 ) (in te rn al q uota tio n m ark s om itte d ). D ep uty Sch neid er dis c o vere d in th e in itia l veh ic le se arc h th at th ere w as pro bab ly a co nceale d co m partm en t in th e car. “It is w ell e sta b lis h ed t h at e v id en ce o f a h id den c o m partm en t can co n tr ib ute to pro bab le cau se to se arc h .” U nite d S ta te s v. Ju ra do-V a lle jo , 380 F.3 d 1235, 1238 (1 0th C ir. 2 004 ) (in te rn al q uota tio n m ark s om itte d ). In Ju ra do-V a lle jo we held th at ” [w ]h eth er p ro bab le c au se to s e arc h a v eh ic le c an b e b ase d o n ev id en ce o f a h id den co m partm en t dep en ds o n tw o f a cto rs : ( 1 ) th e p ro bativ e v alu e o f th e e v id en ce — th at is , th e lik elih ood th at th ere r e ally is a hid den co m partm en t; an d (2 ) th e lik elih ood th at a veh ic le with a hid den co m partm en t w ould , in th e cir c u m sta n ces, be se cre tin g co ntr a b an d.” Id . Dep uty Sch neid er te stif ie d th at b ase d o n th e u nex pecte d c o lo r o f th e car’s u nderc o atin g ( it w as g re en , n ot g old lik e th e outs id e o f th e c ar); th e n ew th ic k , w hite c au lk in g aro und th e flo or; th e g lu in g d ow n o f th e tr u nk carp et pad din g; an d th e obse rv atio ns fr o m his ” fin ger te st,” he knew fro m his tr a in in g an d ex perie n ce t h at t h ere w as a h id d en c o m partm en t i n th e c ar. H e a ls o te stif ie d th at h e h ad fo und a b out 50 c o nceale d c o m partm en ts in v eh ic le s o ver th e co urs e of his care er an d all but one co nta in ed co ntr a b an d. The dis tr ic t co urt accep te d th is te stim ony. T his ev id en ce sa tis fie s both Ju ra do- Va lle jo f a c to rs in d ete rm in in g p ro bab le c au se . S ee id . D ep uty S ch neid er’s tr a n sp orta tio n o f th e c ar to th e s h erif f ‘s d ep artm en t a n d s u bse q uen t s e arc h w as th ere fo re la w fu l. S ee U nite d S ta te s v. Z ucco , 71 F.3 d 1 88, 1 91-9 2 ( 5 th C ir. 1 995) ( ” If s u pporte d b y pro bab le c au se , e v ery p art o f a v eh ic le w hic h m ay co nceal th e obje ct of th e se arc h may be se arc h ed .” ); s e e a ls o M erc a do, 307 F .3 d a t 1 231 (o ff ic er’s d is m an tlin g o f th e alte re d ceilin g o f a v an to se arc h hid den co m partm en t w as le g al b ecau se su pporte d b y p ro bab le c au se ). T hus, th e dis tr ic t c o urt d id n ot e rr in d en yin g M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s m otio n t o s u ppre ss. II. MOTION T O DISMISS A. B ack gro u nd M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o f ile d a m otio n t o d is m is s t h e in dic tm en t f o r s e le ctiv e e n fo rc em en t, a rg uin g th at D ep uty Sch neid er’s decis io n to sto p him w as b ase d , at le ast in part, on his ra ce. H e als o re q ueste d dis c o very re g ard in g se le ctiv e en fo rc em en t, se ek in g in fo rm atio n on vario us polic ie s govern in g th e R usse ll C ounty S herif f ‘s D ep artm en t, in clu din g polic ie s to guard ag ain st ra cia l p ro filin g an d d ocu m en t- re te n tio n p olic ie s; p ers o nnel file s of D ep uty Sch neid er an d an y re co rd s re g ard in g ra cia l- p ro filin g co m pla in ts a g ain st h im ; r e co rd s o f D ep uty S ch neid er’s v eh ic le s to ps f ro m t h e b eg in nin g o f 2 00 0 u ntil F eb ru ary 9 , 2003; a n d m ate ria ls r e la tin g t o D ep uty S ch neid er’s d ru g-in te rd ic tio n t r a in in g. A t th e hearin g on th e m otio n to dis m is s, th e partie s stip ula te d to ad m ittin g in to ev id en ce th e re co rd o f th e h earin g in U nite d S ta te s v. M esa – R och e, 2 88 F .S upp.2 d 1 1 72 (2 003), o n a sim ila r m otio n t o d is m is s f o r r a cia l p ro filin g. T hat h earin g fo cu se d o n a stu dy c o m mis sio ned b y th e K an sa s le g is la tu re an d re le ase d in early 2003 (th e L am berth stu dy). T he L am berth stu dy ex am in ed sto ps m ad e b y la w -e n fo rc em en t o ff ic ers in s e v era l K an sa s metr o polita n are as an d alo ng certa in s tr e tc h es o f in te rs ta te h ig hw ay in K an sa s. * 1262 T he h ig hw ay s to ps in clu ded in th e s tu dy o ccu rre d b etw een O cto ber 2 001 a n d M arc h 2 002. T he s tu dy 1262 6 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) atte m pte d to c o m pare th e p ro po rtio n o f d riv ers o f certa in ra cia l o r e th nic g ro ups sto pped b y p olic e o ff ic ers (s to p data ) to th e pro portio n of driv ers w ho b elo nged to th ose g ro ups (b en ch m ark d ata ). A m ong th e f in din gs w as th at o n I -7 0 b etw een th e C olo ra d o b ord er a n d m ile m ark er 5 0 ( n ear C olb y, K an sa s), 6.8 % of sto ps m ad e by th e K an sa s H ig hw ay Patr o l w ere of H is p an ic s, w hile th e pro portio n o f H is p an ic s t r a v elin g o n t h at s tr e tc h o f hig hw ay w as o nly 1 .8 % . M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o als o pre se n te d data r e g ard in g tr a ff ic sto ps an d arre sts b y o ff ic ers in th e Russe ll County Sherif f ‘s Dep artm en t, in clu din g ( 1 ) r e co rd s o f D ep uty S ch neid er’s s to ps, w hic h sh ow ed th at 3 3.6 9% o f th ose h e sto pped b etw een S ep te m ber 2000 an d A pril 2003 w ere H is p an ic ; an d (2 ) a re p ort sh ow in g th at durin g Ja n uary th ro ugh O cto ber 2 002, in c ase s in volv in g D ep uty S ch neid er, 5 7% o f th e p eo ple a rr e ste d f o r dru g crim es afte r bein g sto pped fo r tr a ff ic v io la tio ns w ere H is p an ic . In d is tr ic t c o urt a n d o n ap peal M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o did not co m pare th ese perc en ta g es to th ose of fe llo w off ic ers e x cep t th at at ora l arg um en t in th is co urt his c o unse l p oin te d o ut th at D ep u ty B au sk e d id n ot sto p a n y H is p an ic s i n 2 000. T he d is tr ic t co urt d en ie d M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s m otio n to dis m is s. The co urt note d th at ” [a ]lth ough [M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o’s ] m otio n is s ty le d a s a m otio n r e g ard in g s e le ctiv e p ro se cu tio n, . . . it is in fa ct a m otio n re g ard in g se le ctiv e en fo rc em en t [b ecau se it] c h alle n ges th e d ecis io n an d a ctio ns o f th e la w e n fo rc em en t o ff ic er, n ot th e ex erc is e o f d is c re tio n b y th e p ro se cu to r.” V ol. I, D oc. 7 0 a t 1 6. It ru le d th at h e d id n ot c arry h is b urd en of pro ducin g “so m e ev id en ce” of dis c rim in ato ry e ff e ct a n d d is c rim in ato ry in te n t a s re q uir e d b y U nite d S ta te s v . A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . 456, 4 68-6 9 , 1 1 6 S .C t. 1480 , 1 34 L .E d.2 d 687 (1 996). R ely in g in p art o n te stim ony a t th e M esa -R och e hearin g by D r. B ria n W ith ro w , a pro fe sso r of C rim in al Ju stic e a t W ic h ita S ta te U niv ers ity , th e dis tr ic t co urt fo und th e L am berth stu dy to be “ir re le v an t a n d u nre lia b le .” V ol. I , D oc. 7 0 a t 2 3. I t p oin te d out th at th e Russe ll County Sherif f ‘s D ep artm en t d id n ot p artic ip ate in th e stu dy an d th at D ep uty S ch neid er h ad n o t w ork ed in a n y o f th e a re as c o vere d in th e s tu dy. ( In f a ct, th e r e co rd s h ow s th at M r. A lc ara z-A re ll a n o w as sto pped a t m ile m ark er 1 88 in R usse ll C ounty , a t le ast 1 38 m ile s east of th e weste rn portio n of 1-7 0 can vasse d b y th e L am berth s tu dy, a n d m ore th an 1 60 m ile s fro m th e easte rn portio n of 1-7 0 can vasse d b y th e s tu dy.) T he c o urt s a id th at d ata r e g ard in g hig hw ay tr a v ele rs in oth er co untie s w ould be tr a n sfe ra b le to R usse ll C ounty only u nder t h e a ssu m ptio n t h at t h e p erc en ta g es o f r a cia l g ro ups i n t h e p opula tio n a n d a m ong d riv ers a re t h e sa m e in b oth lo catio ns, b ut M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o had s h ow n n o r e aso n t o m ak e s u ch a n a ssu m ptio n. It a ls o d oubte d t h e a ccu ra cy o f t h e b en ch m ark d ata in th e c o untie s s tu die d . T he c o urt d ecla re d th at ( 1 ) th e stu dy d id n ot in clu de an ap pen dix sh ow in g how th e d ata w as co lle cte d in th e fie ld , (2 ) th e sa m ple siz e w as “to o sm all to pro vid e re lia b le s ta tis tic al r e su lts ,” id . a t 2 5, a n d ( 3 ) th e s u rv ey ors ‘ a tte m pts t o d ete rm in e t h e e th n ic ity o f d riv ers w ere b ase d o n ” su bje ctiv e a n d s w if t, if n ot s p lit- s e co nd obse rv atio ns” a n d w as t h ere fo re n ot r e lia b le , i d . I n a d ditio n, th e co urt sa id th at th e sto p data w as u ntr u stw orth y becau se th e la w en fo rc em en t ag en cie s a n d th e a re as in clu ded in th e s tu dy w ere n ot se le cte d at ra n dom an d becau se th e la w en fo rc em en t o ff ic ers w ho re c o rd ed th e sto p d ata k new t h at t h eir a ctiv ity w as b ein g o bse rv ed . * 1263 1263 T he c o urt f u rth er s ta te d th at e v en if th e s tu dy w as accep te d a s r e lia b le , its r e su lts d id n ot n ecessa rily s h ow ra cia l pro filin g becau se ra cia l or eth nic g ro ups m ay n ot c o m mit tr a ff ic v io la tio ns in e x act p ro portio n to th eir re p re se n ta tio n o n th e h ig hw ay. F in ally , th e co urt sa id th at th e arre st sta tis tic s co uld not sa tis fy M r. A lc ara z -A re lla n o’s burd en u nder U nite d S ta te s v . J a m es, 2 57 F .3 d 1 1 73, 1 1 79 (1 0th Cir. 2001), to sh ow th at “`a sim ila rly – situ ate d in div id ual of an oth er ra ce co uld hav e been , b ut w as n ot, a rre ste d o r re fe rr e d fo r fe d era l 7 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) pro se cu tio n fo r th e off e n se fo r whic h th e defe n dan t w as a rre ste d a n d r e fe rr e d ,'” V ol. I , D oc. 7 0 a t 3 1 (q uotin g Ja m es, 2 57 F .3 d a t 1 1 79 ). F or th e a rre st s ta tis tic s to b e re le v an t to M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s case , th ey w ould h av e to sh ow “th at n on-H is p an ic s sto pped fo r tr a ff ic v io la tio ns w ere n ot d eta in ed a n d s e arc h ed , e v en if th ey d is p la y ed in dic ato rs of dru g tr a ff ic k in g, w hile sim ila rly s itu ate d H is p an ic s [ s ic ] d riv ers w ere d eta in ed a n d se arc h ed .” Id . a t 3 2. A s f o r t h e e v id en ce s p ecif ic ally r e la tin g t o D ep uty S ch neid er, th e co urt sa id th at re co rd s o f a rre sts a n d ch arg es had no bearin g on M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o’s c la im s o f s e le ctiv e sto ps. T he c o u rt a ls o fo und unre m ark ab le th e ev id en ce th at D ep uty S ch neid er sto ps H is p an ic s m ore fr e q uen tly th an o th er Russe ll County off ic ers , as Off ic er S ch neid er p atr o ls I-7 0 alm ost ex clu siv ely , w hile th e o th er o ff ic ers p atr o l th e s u rr o undin g c ity a n d co unty o f R usse ll, a n d ” th ere a re m ore H is p an ic s tr a v elin g on I-7 0 th an th ere are liv in g in th e su rro undin g c ity a n d c o unty o f R usse ll.” Id . a t 3 3- 34. The co urt decid ed th at an y co m paris o n betw een t h e H is p an ic c o m ponen t o f s to ps m ad e b y th e K an sa s H ig hw ay P atr o l o n th e 5 0-m ile s tr e tc h o f I-7 0 near C olb y (6 .8 5% ) an d th e H is p an ic c o m ponen t of sto ps m ad e by O ff ic er S ch neid er (3 3.6 9% ) w ould b e in valid b ecau se h e h ad fo und th at th e L am berth stu dy w as fa ta lly fla w ed . In s u m , th e co urt ru le d th at M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s s ta tis tic s w ere in su ff ic ie n t to s h ow d is c rim in ato ry e ff e ct. T he d is tr ic t c o urt w as a ls o u npers u ad ed th at M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o had pro duced ev id en ce of dis c rim in ato ry in te n t. T he c o urt s a id th at in o rd er to sh ow dis c rim in ato ry in te n t, M r. Alc ara z- A re lla n o must “p re se n t so m e non-s ta tis tic al ev id en ce to dem onstr a te th at D ep uty S ch neid er acte d w ith d is c rim in ato ry in te n t w hen h e s to pped d efe n dan t.” Id . at 36. It note d th at Dep uty S ch neid er ” is n ot a lle g ed to h av e e n gag ed in a n y ra cia l la n guag e or actio ns oth er th an th e sto p its e lf .” Id . at 36-3 7. T he co urt co nsid ere d th e L am berth s tu dy to b e ir re le v an t to d is c rim in ato ry in te n t b ecau se it d id n ot a tte m pt to s h ow th at th e obse rv ed la w -e n fo rc em en t o ff ic ers k new th e ra ce o f driv ers befo re m ak in g th e decis io n to sto p th em . B. Analysis M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o ap peals th e d is tr ic t co urt’s d en ia l of his se le ctiv e-e n fo rc em en t m otio n to d is m is s an d his acco m pan y in g motio n fo r dis c o very . T he “C onstitu tio n pro hib its se le ctiv e en fo rc em en t o f th e la w b ase d o n co nsid era tio ns su ch a s ra ce.” W hre n v. U nite d S ta te s, 5 17 U .S . 806, 8 13 , 1 1 6 S .C t. 1 769 , 1 35 L .E d.2 d 8 9 (1 996); s e e W ayte v . U nite d S ta te s, 4 70 U .S . 5 98, 6 08 n . 9 , 105 S .C t. 1 524 , 8 4 L .E d.2 d 5 47 (1 985) (b an o n dis c rim in ato ry la w en fo rc em en t ap plie s to th e fe d era l g overn m en t u nder th e F if th A m en dm en t) . ” R acia lly se le ctiv e la w e n fo rc e m en t v io la te s th is n atio n’s co nstitu tio nal valu es at th e most fu ndam en ta l le v el; in deed , u neq ual a p plic atio n o f crim in al la w to w hite a n d b la c k p ers o ns w as o ne of t h e c en tr a l e v ils a d dre sse d b y t h e f ra m ers o f t h e F ourte en th A m en dm en t.” M arsh all v. C olu m bia L ea R eg ‘l H osp ., 3 45 F .3 d 1 1 57, 1 1 67 (1 0th C ir. 2 003). T he S upre m e C ourt h as h eld th at a p ers o n m ak in g a s e le ctiv e-p ro se cu tio n *1264 c la im m ust e sta b lis h tw o e le m en ts : ” [1 ] th e f e d era l p ro se cu to ria l p olic y h ad a dis c rim in ato ry eff e ct an d [2 ] it was m otiv ate d by a dis c rim in ato ry purp ose .” A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . at 465 , 1 1 6 S.C t. 1480 (in te rn al q uota tio n m ark s o m it te d ). ” T o e sta b lis h a d is c rim in ato ry e ff e ct in a [ s e le ctiv e-p ro se cu tio n ] ra ce c ase , th e c la im an t m ust s h ow th at s im ila rly – situ ate d in div id uals o f a d if f e re n t ra ce w ere n ot pro se cu te d .” Id . T he e le m en ts a re e sse n tia lly th e sa m e fo r a se le ctiv e-e n fo rc em en t cla im . A defe n dan t “c h alle n gin g alle g ed ra cia l d is c rim in atio n in tr a ff ic sto ps an d arr e sts m ust p re se n t ev id en ce fro m whic h a ju ry co uld r e aso nab ly in fe r th at th e la w e n fo rc em en t o ff ic ia ls in volv ed were m otiv ate d by a dis c rim in ato ry p urp ose an d th eir actio ns had a dis c rim in ato ry e ff e ct.” M arsh all, 3 45 F .3 d a t 1 1 68 . T o s a ti s fy th e 1264 8 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) dis c rim in ato ry -e ff e ct ele m en t, one w ho cla im s se le ctiv e e n fo rc em en t ” m ust . . . m ak e a c re d ib le s h ow in g th at a sim ila rly -s itu ate d in div id ual of an oth er ra ce co uld hav e been , but was not, [ s to pped o r] a rre ste d . . . f o r th e o ff e n se f o r w hic h th e defe n dan t w as [s to pped or] arr e ste d . . . .” J a m es, 2 57 F .3 d a t 1 1 79 . A nd th e d is c rim in ato ry – purp ose ele m en t re q uir e s a sh ow in g th at d is c rim in ato ry in te n t w as a ” m otiv atin g fa cto r in th e d ecis io n” to e n fo rc e th e c rim in al la w a g ain st th e defe n dan t. M arsh all, 3 45 F.3 d at 11 68 . D is c rim in ato ry in te n t can be sh ow n by eith er d ir e ct or cir c u m sta n tia l ev id en ce. S ee Unite d S ta te s v . D eb erry, 4 30 F .3 d 1 294, 1 299 (1 0th C ir. 2 005). T he s ta n dard fo r p ro of o f a s e le ctiv e-p ro se cu tio n cla im is a ” d em an din g” o ne, A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . at 463 , 1 1 6 S.C t. 1480 , becau se a se le ctiv e- p ro se cu tio n c la im an t is r e q uestin g th e ju dic ia ry to e x erc is e p ow er o ver a “sp ecia l p ro vin ce” o f th e ex ecu tiv e b ra n ch , i d . a t 4 64, 1 1 6 S .C t. 1 480 , a n d ju dic ia l re v ie w of pro se cu to ria l decis io ns co uld ” c h ill la w en fo rc em en t by su bje ctin g th e pro se cu to r’s motiv es an d decis io nm ak in g to o uts id e in quir y , a n d m ay u nderm in e p ro se cu to ria l eff e ctiv en ess by re v ealin g th e Govern m en t’s e n fo rc em en t p olic y,” id . at 4 65, 1 1 6 S .C t. 1 480 (in te rn al quota tio n mark s om itte d ). Sim ila r cau tio n is re q uir e d in re v ie w in g a cla im of se le ctiv e la w en fo rc em en t. “[C ]h arg es of ra cia l d is c rim in atio n . . . m ay be easy to m ak e an d dif f ic u lt to d is p ro ve.” M arsh all, 3 45 F .3 d a t 1 1 67 . E xecu tiv e-b ra n ch off ic ia ls posse ss bro ad d is c re tio n in d ete rm in in g w hen to m ak e a tr a ff ic s to p o r a n a rre st. S ee id . J u dic ia l in te rfe re n ce w ith la w -e n fo rc em en t d is c re tio n m ig ht “in duce p olic e o ff ic ers to pro te ct th em se lv es ag ain st fa ls e a ccu sa tio ns in w ay s th at a re c o unte rp ro ductiv e to f a ir a n d e ff e ctiv e e n fo rc em en t o f th e la w s,” s u ch as b y d ir e ctin g la w -e n fo rc em en t re so urc es aw ay fro m m in ority n eig hborh oods. I d . A cco rd in gly , t h e sta n dard fo r pro vin g a se le ctiv e-e n fo rc em en t cla im sh ould be, as w ith se le ctiv e-p ro se cu tio n cla im s, ” a d em an din g o ne.” M arsh all, 3 45 F .3 d a t 1 1 67 (q uotin g A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . at 4 63 , 1 1 6 S .C t. 1 480 ). F or sim ila r re aso ns d is c o very is lim ite d . A s w e sta te d in Ja m es, ” th e s h ow in g n ecessa ry to o b ta in d is c o very f o r a s e le ctiv e p ro se c u tio n d efe n se m ust `its e lf b e a sig nif ic an t b arrie r to th e litig atio n o f in su bsta n tia l cla im s.'” J a m es, 2 57 F.3 d at 11 78 (q uotin g A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . at 4 64 , 1 1 6 S .C t. 1 480 ). A lth ough defe n dan ts se ek in g dis c o very n eed n ot e sta b lis h a p rim a fa cie c ase o f s e le ctiv e pro se cu tio n, i d . at 11 78, th ey m ust sa tis fy a “rig oro us sta n dard ,” A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . a t 4 68 , 11 6 S.C t. 1480 . They must pro duce “so m e ev id en ce” of both dis c rim in ato ry eff e ct an d dis c rim in ato ry in te n t. A rm str o ng, 517 U .S . a t 4 70 , 11 6 S .C t. 1 480 ; a cco rd U nite d S ta te s v . B ass, 5 36 U .S . 8 62, 8 63 , 1 22 S .C t. 2 389 , 1 53 L .E d.2 d 7 69 (2 002) (p er cu ria m ). In Ja m es w e ap plie d th is s ta n dard to a c la im o f s e le ctiv e e n fo rc em en t. S ee id . a t 1 1 78-8 1. * 1265 1265 W e re v ie w fo r ab use of dis c re tio n th e dis tr ic t co urt’s g ra n t o r d en ia l o f a m otio n to d is m is s a n in dic tm en t. U nite d Sta te s v. Furm an, 31 F.3 d 1034, 1 037 ( 1 0 th C ir. 1 994). I n Ja m es, 2 57 F .3 d a t 1 1 78 , we re v ie w ed a se le ctiv e-p ro se cu tio n dis c o very o rd er d e n ovo ra th er th an fo r a b use o f dis c re tio n. W e dis tin guis h ed F urm an on th e gro unds th at th e d efe n dan t in Ja m es w as se ek in g dis c o very r a th er th an d is m is sa l a n d th at r e v ie w o f th e d is c o very o rd er in volv ed o nly a d ete rm in atio n of t h e l e g al a d eq uacy o f t h e e v id en ce r a th er t h an a d ete rm in atio n of fa cts . S ee id . at 11 7 8. W hen , how ev er, as in th is case , th e d ecis io n re g ard in g dis c o very pro perly re sts on fa ct- fin din g, we re v ie w th e fin din gs under th e cle arly -e rr o neo us sta n dard . C f. E nglis h v . C ody, 2 41 F .3 d 1 279, 1 282 (1 0th C ir. 2 001) ( w e r e v ie w a ” d is tr ic t c o urt’s l e g al co nclu sio ns d e n ovo a n d its f a ctu al f in din gs u nder th e c le arly e rro neo us s ta n dard .” ( in te rn al q uota tio n m ark s o m itte d )). 9 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) Mr. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s cla im s fa il o n th e in te n t pro ng o f th e te sts f o r d is m is sa l a n d d is c o very . H e atte m pts to pro ve in te n t th ro ugh sta tis tic al ev id en ce o f a d is c rim in ato ry e ff e ct. H e a rg ues t h at th e “sh eer dis p arity ” betw een th e perc en ta g e of H is p an ic s on th e ro ad an d th e perc en ta g e of H is p an ic s sto pp ed sh ow s th at D ep uty S ch neid er ta rg ets th em . A plt. B r. at 40. S ee In t’l B hd. of Tea m ste rs v. U nite d S ta te s, 4 31 U .S . 3 24, 3 39 n . 20, 9 7 S.C t. 1843 , 5 2 L.E d.2 d 396 (1 977) (” S ta tis tic s s h ow in g r a cia l o r e th nic im bala n ce a re p ro bativ e . . . b ecau se su ch im bala n ce is o fte n a te llta le s ig n o f p urp ose fu l d is c rim in atio n”). H ere , h ow ev er, w e hav e dir e ct ev id en ce of D ep uty S ch neid er’s m otiv atio n in sto p pin g M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o. A t th e h earin g o n th e m otio n to d is m is s, D ep uty S ch neid er te stif ie d th at h e h ad d ecid ed to s to p M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o as so on as he had d ete rm in ed b y ra d ar th at h e w as sp eed in g. T he dis tr ic t co urt accep te d Dep uty Sch neid er’s t e stim ony, s ta tin g: ” [D ep uty S ch neid er] n otic ed a g old c a r tr a v elin g e astb ound, a n d d ete rm in ed b y ra d ar th at it w as g oin g 7 7 m .p .h . in a 7 0 m .p .h . zo ne. D ep uty S ch neid er r o utin ely s to ps c ars g oin g th at sp eed . . . an d d ecid ed to sto p th is o ne as w ell.” V ol. I, D oc. 7 0 a t 1 . M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o co nte n ds th at D ep uty S ch neid er d oes n ot m ak e a d ecis io n base d so le ly on sp eed in g but als o c o nsid ers th e driv er’s eth nic ity . He poin ts to D ep uty S ch neid er’s p ra ctic e o f p ullin g a lo ngsid e th e v eh ic le to lo ok in sid e b efo re e x ecu tin g a s to p, th us allo w in g h im to d ete rm in e th e ra ce o f th e in div id uals in sid e. He als o note s th e dis p ro portio nate n um ber o f H is p an ic d riv ers th at D ep uty S ch neid er s to ps — 3 4% o f h is s to ps in a tw o-y ear p erio d w ere o f H is p an ic s. T his e v id en ce h as su bsta n tia l ap peal. But we defe r to th e fa ctf in der’s e v alu atio n o f c re d ib ility . S ee A nderso n v. C ity o f B esse m er C ity , 4 70 U .S . 5 64, 5 75 , 1 05 S .C t. 1504 , 8 4 L.E d.2 d 518 (1 985). A nd th e dis tr ic t c o urt’s f in din g t h at t h e d ecis io n t o s to p M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s car w as m ad e b efo re D ep uty S ch neid er d ro ve u p to it f o re c lo se s a n y p ossib ility th at h e m ad e th e d ecis io n to sto p b ase d o n M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s e th nic ity . M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o does n ot a rg ue th at D ep uty S ch neid er c o uld h av e dete rm in ed M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o’s e th nic ity a t th e tim e o f th e r a d ar r e ad in g, w hen th e v eh ic le s w ere a p pro ach in g on e an oth er at so m eth in g lik e 140 m ph. B ecau se th e d is tr ic t c o urt m ad e a fa ctu al fin din g th at D ep uty S ch neid er m ad e th e d ecis io n to sto p M r. Alc ara z-A re lla n o befo re know in g his e th nic ity , he can not sa tis fy th e dis c rim in ato ry – in te n t pro ng of th e A rm str o ng sta n dard fo r obta in in g d is c o very o r d is m is sa l o n th e b asis o f se le ctiv e en fo rc em en t. Perh ap s Mr. Alc ara z- A re lla n o c o uld h av e c o nvin ced th e d is tr ic t c o urt o th erw is e if h e w ere a b le to o bta in th e re q ueste d d is c o very . B ut h e d oes n ot a rg ue o n a p peal h ow dis c o very w ould h elp in th at re g ard , a n d it is n ot ap pare n t to us. T he data on D ep uty S ch neid er p re se n te d to us by M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o *1266 in dic ate s th at he alr e ad y posse sse s th e re le v an t in fo rm atio n re g ard in g D ep uty Sch neid er’s sto ps an d arre sts . T he d is tr ic t co urt d id n ot ab use its d is c re tio n i n d en yin g d is c o very . 1266 1 1 A lth ough dir e ct ev id en ce esta b lis h es th at D ep uty S ch neid er w as not m otiv ate d by ra ce in h is d ecis io n to sto p M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o, th e sto p sta tis tic s th at Mr. A lc ara z-A re lla n o has pre se n te d are d is tu rb in g. W e assu m e th at in fu tu re in vestig atio ns f e d era l p ro se cu to rs w ill ta k e th e u tm ost c are to a ssu re th em se lv es th at ra cia l p ro filin g is n ot lu rk in g b eh in d s u ch sta tis tic s. H av in g h eld th at M r. A lc ara z-A re lla n o fa ile d to p re se n t ev id en ce sa tis fy in g A rm str o ng’s d is c rim in ato ry -in te n t p ro ng, w e n eed n ot a d dre ss w heth er th e ev id en ce he pre se n te d sa tis fie d th e dis c rim in ato ry -e ff e ct p ro ng. S ee J a m es, 2 57 F .3 d at 1 1 81 . III. CONCLUSION D ep uty Sch neid er’s dete n tio n of M r. A lc ara z- A re lla n o a n d h is s e arc h o f th e c ar d id n ot v io la te th e F ourth A m en dm en t. T here fo re , w e A FFIR M th e d is tr ic t c o urt’s d en ia l o f t h e m otio n t o s u ppre ss 10 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006) ev id en ce. A ls o , M r. A lc ara z -A re lla n o has not sa tis fie d h is b urd en to p re se n t so m e e v id en ce o f dis c rim in ato ry in te n t, s o w e A FFIR M th e o rd er o f th e d is tr ic t c o urt d en yin g h is m otio ns to d is m is s a n d f o r d is c o very . 11 U.S. v. Alcaraz-Arellano 441 F.3d 1252 (10th Cir. 2006)