Case: 24-50432 Document: 72-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit _____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 24-50432 consolidated with FILED No. 24-50439 May 2, 2025 _____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Eleuterio Zubia-Melendez, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC Nos. 4:23-CR-488-1, 4:16-CR-422-1 ______________________________ Before Wiener, Ho, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * Eleuterio Zubia-Melendez appeals his guilty plea conviction for aiding and abetting the transportation of illegal aliens for financial gain, as well as the order revoking the term of supervised release he was serving at the time of the offense. The appeals have been consolidated for our review.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 24-50432 Document: 72-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2025

No. 24-50432 c/w No. 24-50439 For the first time on appeal, Zubia-Melendez argues that in light of our recent decision in United States v. Smith, 110 F.4th 817 (5th Cir. 2024), absent individualized suspicion or specific criminal activity, the use of license plate readers at an unmanned border patrol checkpoint to flag his vehicle as that of a potential smuggler constituted an illegal search that violated the Fourth Amendment and, thus, evidence obtained as a result of a subsequent traffic stop should be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree. The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeals, asserting that Zubia- Melendez’s valid unconditional guilty plea waived these issues.

We conclude that Zubia-Melendez’s voluntary and unconditional guilty plea waived his Fourth Amendment claims in both appeals. See United States v. Cothran, 302 F.3d 279, 286 (5th Cir. 2002). Zubia-Melendez’s various challenges to the waiver are unavailing. See Class v. United States, 583 U.S. 174, 182 (2018). Therefore, we do not reach the merits of his Fourth Amendment claims. See United States v. Broussard, 882 F.3d 104, 109 (5th Cir. 2018).

Accordingly, the Government’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the appeals are DISMISSED.