Case: 23-50827 Document: 58-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/15/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-50827 Summary Calendar FILED ____________ August 15, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce United States of America, Clerk Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jaime Lopez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:23-CR-288-2 ______________________________ Before Smith, Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * After a stipulated bench trial, Jaime Lopez was found guilty of conspir- acy to import methamphetamine, importation of meth, conspiracy to possess meth with intent to distribute, and possession with intent to distribute meth.

On appeal, Lopez contends that the denial of his motion to suppress was erroneous because there was insufficient evidence indicating that he was _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 23-50827 Document: 58-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/15/2024

No. 23-50827

engaged in any wrongdoing at the time of his seizure.

When considering the denial of a motion to suppress, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. United States v. Guerrero-Barajas, 240 F.3d 428, 431–32 (5th Cir. 2001).

We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, here, the government. See United States v. Moore, 805 F.3d 590, 593 (5th Cir. 2015).

Our review of the evidence supports the denial of Lopez’s suppression motion in light of the three-factor test for application of the extended border search doctrine. See United States v. Cardenas, 9 F.3d 1139, 1148 (5th Cir. 1993). That ruling is AFFIRMED. See United States v. Massi, 761 F.3d 512, 520 (5th Cir. 2014); see also United States v. Powell, 732 F.3d 361, 369 (5th Cir. 2013) (holding that a ruling on a motion to suppress may be affirmed on any ground established by the record).

Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36, we may review a judg- ment sua sponte for clerical errors and may remand for the limited purpose of correcting those errors. United States v. Illies, 805 F.3d 607, 610 (5th Cir. 2015). The written judgment incorrectly states that Lopez pleaded guilty to all four counts of the indictment. The record shows that he was found guilty on all four counts after a stipulated bench trial. Accordingly, this case is REMANDED for the limited purpose of correcting the clerical error in the written judgment. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 36.