FLANIGAN, Judge.
The trial court, sitting without a jury, found defendant guilty of trafficking drugs in the second degree, § 195.223, 1 and he was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. Defendant appeals.
Defendant contends that the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress 45 bundles of marijuana and other evidence seized by officers from a Dodge van driven by defendant, and statements made by defendant subsequent to the stop, because the challenged items were obtained in violation of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and Art. 1, § 15 of the Missouri Constitution, in that the officer, Sgt. Mike Woods of the
In addition to its formal portions, the information charged that on November 10, 1992, in Greene County, the defendant possessed and brought into the State of Missouri more than 30 kilograms of a mixture or substance containing marijuana.
Missouri Highway Patrol, had no probable cause to stop the Dodge and seize defendant because Sgt. Woods did not have specific and articulable facts which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warranted the intrusion of the stop and seizure.
An evidentiary hearing was held on the motion to suppress, and the motion was overruled. Later, the parties stipulated that the evidence offered at the suppression hearing could be considered as part of the trial evidence. The parties also stipulated that the substance the arresting officers found in the Dodge consisted of 167.3 pounds of marijuana. At the trial, defendant renewed his constitutional objections to the challenged items.
The state's witnesses were Sgt. Mike Woods, Cpl. David Henson, interpreter Romeo Barrera, and Trooper Timothy Russett. Defendant testified at the suppression hearing but not at the trial.
The testimony included the following:
Sgt. Mike Woods
"Since 1987 I have had training in highway drug interdiction and I have made 50 stops that have yielded illegal narcotics. In 10 or 15 cases, I investigated situations where there were alterations to the body of the vehicle. With my training it is easy to detect a vehicle that's been altered.
"On November 10, 1992, I was on duty on I-44 in Greene County, watching for a certain vehicle coming from Oklahoma. I was looking for this vehicle because of a communication, Exhibit 1, from the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. The communications officer at Troop D gave me Exhibit 1, and I had it as I was parked.
"Exhibit 1 reads:
'10:22 11/10/92 00221 MOMHPDD01
TXT
MHP CARTHAGE
CHECK TO OWN SATISFACTION--POSSIBLE DRUG INTERDICTION. TROOPER JERRY LAWSON # 575 JUST RELEASED A GOLD 1985 DODGE VAN WITH IL LIC/WHH724 FROM MILE MARKER 260 EASTBOUND ON THE WILL ROGERS TURNPIKE. WOULD PUT IT IN MO. IN ABOUT AN HOUR. DRIVER IS A JUAN RODRIGUEZ. TROOPER OBTAINED A CONSENT TO SEARCH, BUT WAS UNABLE TO LOCATE ANYTHING AND NO DOG WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME. HE ADVISED THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE BED OF THE VAN HAS BEEN RAISED UP. IF HAVE A DOG AVAILABLE IT MIGHT BE WORTHWHILE TO CHECK THIS VEHICLE WITH A DOG. THE DRIVER HAS KEYS TO IGNITION, BUT NO KEYS TO REAR OR SIDE DOORS AND HAD AIRLINE TICKET WHERE HE FLEW INTO EL PASO, TX, BUT HAS ONLY ONE CHANGE OF CLOTHES WITH HIM. AUTH: TROOPER JERRY LAWSON # 575. DPS VINITA, OKLA. MJG 11/10/92 11:20.'
"I saw a vehicle driving east on Highway I-44 which matched the description in the bulletin. I stopped it at 2:20 p.m. My reason for stopping it was to investigate the stop of the Oklahoma trooper. Cpl. Henson was close by with a dog, so I knew the dog was available.
"Defendant was the sole occupant of the van. He gave me an Illinois driver's license and the vehicle registration. The vehicle had an Illinois tag. Defendant and I discussed the ownership of the van. It was checked to someone else, I don't recall the name. I think Salvadore was either the first or last name. The vehicle was not listed as stolen. Defendant said he was driving the van for that person to Illinois. Defendant said he did not know him.
"Defendant has a heavy accent but I was able to communicate with him. The fact defendant did not know the owner of the van and the person was paying him to drive it, and it was coming from El Paso, a known drug area, and going to Illinois, made me
suspicious of his trip. We have a lot of drug shipments coming from the south going to Chicago. Drug couriers often use other people's vehicles.
"I asked defendant for permission to search his vehicle. He was cooperative and agreed to my searching it. I got out a written consent form. On one side it's in English and on one side it's in Spanish. He filled it out and signed it. I did not threaten him into giving consent. Defendant said he could read Spanish. Before he signed the form, we talked about drugs and whether he was hauling drugs. He denied he was hauling drugs. After obtaining the consent to search, I found two airline tickets in the vehicle.
"I conducted a full search. I called Cpl. Henson and his dog to the scene. While Henson was on the way, I saw some weld marks or torch marks on the undercarriage. I noticed the mounting brackets of the rear seat appeared as if they had been cut and shortened to bring the seat down to accommodate what appeared to be a raised portion of the floor. I was able to see that without getting into the van.
"Henson arrived in a couple of minutes. He must have been already on his way because he was there very shortly. He walked the dog around the vehicle. The dog scratched at the left rear wheel well area on the driver's side, and Henson told me the dog alerted. We entered the van and noticed again that the brackets were cut. I pulled up a piece of carpet and saw a screw hole that a screw was not in. With my flashlight I could see plastic wrapped packages inside that floor area. I punctured a package and it smelled strongly of marijuana. I arrested defendant, read him his rights, and took the van to headquarters.
"My sole reason for the stop was the bulletin. I did not stop the vehicle for speeding. I searched because of his having signed the consent. Under the existing circumstances, the quick availability of the dog, I was not going to release him until I checked to see if there was some kind of dope in the car. I did not enter the vehicle until the dog alerted."
Cpl. David Henson
"I arrived at the scene at 2:27 p.m. on November 10, 1992. The dog and I have been involved in almost 300 searches for narcotics. I started the dog at the left front corner. When we reached the driver's side rear wheel well, the dog alerted to the odor of narcotics. Sgt. Woods had already told me he had consent to search the vehicle. I was at troop headquarters when the dispatch came in from Oklahoma."
Interpreter Romeo Barrera
"Spanish is my primary language. I assisted in taking defendant's statement. Exhibit 3 is the consent form signed by defendant for the search."
Trooper Timothy Russett
"I interviewed defendant with interpreter Barrera. Defendant was advised of his rights in Spanish. Defendant said he was driving the van to Chicago for some friends he met in El Paso. He had known them previously in Chicago. He said he had been given $80, a full tank of gas, three cartons of cigarettes, and a six-pack of Coca Cola to drive the van to Chicago. He was told to park the van anywhere he chose in Chicago and go home and a man would contact him and find out where he left the van. The unused portions of the airline tickets are from El Paso to Chicago. The name on the first ticket is Antonio Esparza and the name on the second ticket is Juan Rodriguez. Defendant said he had known Esparza in Chicago because they had worked for the same company and that Esparza was the one who hired him to drive the vehicle. Defendant said he did not know there was any marijuana in the vehicle."
Defendant Juan Rodriguez
"I speak a little English. I gave Officer Woods permission to search the car I was driving. I consented because I didn't think I was carrying anything wrong. The persons who gave me permission to drive this car were Jose and another one named Antonio. They told me the van belonged to a man named Salvadore. The Oklahoma trooper
Lawson, stopped me about 10:30 a.m. on November 10. He stopped me because my van was weaving, and he gave me a warning. He asked for permission to search and I filled out a form, and he got in the van to look around and later gave me my license and said I could go on. I didn't have any keys that would open the side door on the van.
"State's Exhibit 4 is the warning ticket Trooper Lawson gave me. State's Exhibit 5 is the form Lawson filled out. After I signed Exhibit 5, Lawson got inside the van and searched."
Exhibit 4 was a warning ticket issued by Trooper Lawson to defendant for "weaving on roadway." It contains a time notation of 10:26 a.m. Exhibit 5, a consent to search, printed in Spanish and signed by defendant and witnessed by Trooper Lawson, has a time notation of 10:33 a.m.
Appellate review of a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress is limited to a determination of sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the trial court's finding. State v. Villa-Perez, 835 S.W.2d 897, 902 (Mo. banc 1992). "[I]n so doing, we examine all circumstances and the total atmosphere of the case, and defer to the trial court's vantage point for assessing the credibility of the witnesses and weighing the evidence." Id. "Only if the trial court's judgment is clearly erroneous will an appellate court reverse." State v....
