United States v. Davis, Terrance L. ( 2000 )


Menu:
  • In the
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the Seventh Circuit
    No. 99-2334
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.
    Terrance L. Davis,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of Illinois.
    No. 3:98CR30075--Jeanne E. Scott, Judge.
    Argued November 17, 1999--Decided January 5, 2000
    Before Eschbach, Easterbrook, and Rovner, Circuit
    Judges.
    Easterbrook, Circuit Judge. As part of his guilty
    plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm,
    see 18 U.S.C. sec.922(g)(1), Terrance Davis
    reserved the right to appeal from the denial of
    his motion to suppress the weapon. See Fed. R.
    Crim. P. 11(a)(2). Davis was the passenger in a
    car that had been stopped to investigate the
    possibility that the auto had been stolen. When
    asked to get out of the car, Davis refused; his
    eventual removal revealed two weapons. If the
    stop was proper, then the officers had every
    right to demand that Davis get out. Maryland v.
    Wilson, 
    519 U.S. 408
    , 414-15 (1997); see also
    Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 
    434 U.S. 106
    (1977). Thus
    the appeal turns on the question whether
    reasonable suspicion supported the investigatory
    stop. The less the intrusion, the less suspicion
    is required to make the process "reasonable," see
    United States v. Chaidez, 
    919 F.2d 1193
    , 1197-98
    (7th Cir. 1990), and this would have been an
    unintrusive stop had not the driver made such a
    ruckus that he had to be handcuffed and the
    passengers asked to emerge to assure the
    officers’ safety.
    According to the stipulated facts, Officer
    Carpenter of the Springfield, Illinois, police
    had been assigned to investigate the theft of a
    gold Saturn by the owner’s 16-year-old son. When
    Carpenter saw a gold Saturn being driven in
    Springfield by a young man of the same race as
    the thief he became intrigued. Some 6,000 gold
    Saturns have been sold in Illinois in recent
    years, so even though Springfield has less than
    a hundredth of the state’s population there are
    bound to be gold Saturns on the streets, some of
    them driven by young black men. But Carpenter saw
    something extra, something that raised legitimate
    suspicions: this gold Saturn lacked a license
    plate. Changing license plates is a car thief’s
    standard precaution. Although the car had a
    temporary sticker, of the kind the state issues
    while an application for a new license plate is
    pending, the sticker itself was unusual. Illinois
    issues self-adhesive stickers that are applied to
    the inside of the rear window. Yet this sticker
    was torn and held in place with masking tape.
    Perhaps it had been removed from the car for
    which it had been issued and transferred to the
    gold Saturn, an improper step to which a thief
    might resort in order to conceal the absence of
    good title (which is essential to obtain a
    legitimate sticker or license plate). Moreover,
    when Carpenter began to follow the Saturn, the
    driver and passengers behaved in a manner that
    the district court characterized as "furtive":
    the driver changed lanes multiple times, and the
    passengers stared back at the patrol car. So
    Carpenter stopped the Saturn, which led to the
    discovery of the guns. Cf. United States v.
    Tipton, 
    3 F.3d 1119
    (7th Cir. 1993) (stop proper
    where temporary sticker was hard to read). It
    turned out that the driver was 20 rather than 16
    years old and that the car had not been stolen.
    But this does not undercut the reasonableness of
    the suspicion that led to the stop. Had
    everything been on the up and up, the driver and
    his passengers soon would have been back on the
    road. But the occupants knew that they had
    something to hide and ended up giving their
    secret away.
    Suppose residents of Springfield owned about a
    hundred gold Saturns in May 1998, when this stop
    occurred. Any given gold Saturn driven by a young
    man thus was more likely than not to have been in
    the hands of its owner (or an authorized driver).
    Compare Michael O. Finkelstein & William B.
    Fairley, A Bayesian Approach to Identification
    Evidence, 83 Harv. L. Rev. 489 (1970), with
    Laurence H. Tribe, Trial by Mathematics:
    Precision and Ritual in the Legal Process, 84
    Harv. L. Rev. 1329 (1971). See also Symposium,
    Probability and Inference in the Law of Evidence,
    66 B.U. L. Rev. 377 (1986). Cf. Branion v.
    Gramly, 
    855 F.2d 1256
    (7th Cir. 1988); Howard v.
    Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 
    160 F.3d 358
    (7th Cir.
    1998). But this gold Saturn stuck out: its driver
    was the same race and from a distance appeared to
    be the same age as the thief, and the lack of a
    license plate, plus the temporary sticker with
    signs of tampering and the furtive conduct, would
    have prompted suspicion in the mind of a
    reasonable officer. No more is necessary to stop
    a car in order to verify that it has not been
    stolen, and the events after the stop led
    directly to the discovery of the evidence.
    Carpenter acted with reasonable suspicion, so the
    conviction is
    affirmed.