United States v. Alvarez

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2022 · Criminal Law

40 F.4th 339 (2022)

Updated August 1, 2026

Criminal Lawconspiracyagreementreasonable suspicionTerry stopcompleted felonystale informationgeneric suspect description

Facts

During a statewide roundup of gang members with outstanding warrants, officers received information about one subject described only as a Hispanic male in the Leopard and Up River area who may be on a bicycle and had run from officers in the past on a bicycle with large handlebars. The officers had no photograph and no information about the subject's age, build, clothing, identifying features, or when he had last been seen in the area; they also knew nothing specific about the bicycle other than its large handlebars. Officers later saw Alvarez, a Hispanic man riding a bicycle with large handlebars in that area, told him to stop, then blocked the sidewalk and detained him after he continued riding. A frisk revealed a revolver and ammunition, and the officers later learned Alvarez was not the suspect they had been looking for.

Issue

Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to stop Alvarez based on a sparse description of a wanted suspect as a Hispanic male who may be in a particular area on a bicycle with large handlebars, together with the area's gang activity and the officers' reliance on roundup information. Also, whether the collective knowledge doctrine could supply reasonable suspicion on this record.

Rule

Reasonable suspicion is a low threshold, but it must rest on specific and articulable facts viewed under the totality of the circumstances and must exist before the stop begins. When officers are investigating a wanted person for completed criminal activity rather than responding to ongoing or very recent crime, the description and information relied upon must be sufficiently specific and particularized; a general physical description that fits large numbers of people, especially when coupled with vague, stale, or unsupported location information, does not justify a stop. Officers may rely on collective knowledge or police-channel information only if the government shows the originating officers possessed articulable facts amounting to reasonable suspicion.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Officers in El Paso are trying to locate a man wanted on an outstanding felony warrant. A briefing sheet describes him only as an "Asian male" who sometimes rides a silver scooter near downtown, but gives no age, height, clothing, photo, or date when he was last seen there. Two hours later, officers stop Daniel Kim, an Asian man riding a silver scooter three blocks from the area named in the sheet.

Was the stop supported by reasonable suspicion?

Explanation. For a stop aimed at locating a wanted person tied to completed criminal activity, officers need specific and articulable facts that particularly identify the person stopped. A broad description limited to race, general conveyance, and a vague area—without age, build, clothing, photo, or when the suspect was last seen—fits many innocent people and does not supply reasonable suspicion. The governing rule requires more specificity in completed-crime or warrant situations than in fresh-crime cases.