Lorena Santos Adame v. Loretta Lynch, No. 16-1562 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Smith, Arnold and Colloton, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. Assuming for purposes of discussion that an egregious constitutional violation may justify suppression of evidence in the immigration context, petitioner's traffic stop did not qualify as the officer who stopped defendant had probable cause to believe she was driving by barred.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1562 ___________________________ Lorena Santos Adame, lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner, v. Dana J. Boente, Acting Attorney General of the United States,* lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent. ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: January 30, 2017 Filed: February 8, 2017 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, ARNOLD, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Lorena Santos Adame, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which affirmed an immigration * Dana J. Boente is automatically substituted for his predecessor, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2). judge’s decision denying her motion to suppress evidence and granting her voluntary departure in lieu of removal. Adame asserted that the evidence should have been suppressed because the traffic stop that led to the discovery of her immigration status and removal proceedings amounted to an egregious violation of her constitutional rights. Assuming for the sake of analysis that an egregious constitutional violation may justify suppression of evidence in the immigration context, see Puc-Ruiz v. Holder, 629 F.3d 771, 777-78 (8th Cir. 2010), the record does not support Adame’s claim that the traffic stop was such an egregious violation. The police officer who stopped Adame had probable cause to believe she was driving while barred, in violation of Iowa Code § 321.561, based on his running the vehicle’s license plates through the National Crime Information Center, determining the registered owner was barred from driving, and confirming that Adame matched the description of the registered owner. See United States v. Linkous, 285 F.3d 716, 719 (8th Cir. 2002); cf. United States v. Chartier, 772 F.3d 539, 543 (8th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, we deny the petition. See Martinez Carcamo v. Holder, 713 F.3d 916, 921 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of review). ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
