C.D.Ill.: RS based in part on officer’s knowledge of diversionary insuring after purchase of car

The stop was for a traffic offense with probable cause. After a few questions, reasonable suspicion developed; United States v. Cole, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154134 (C.D. Ill. Sept. 10, 2019); and it’s detailed and based in part on the officer’s knowledge about the vehicle and how it was licensed and insured:

In light of these principles, Trooper Chapman had reasonable suspicion based on articulable fact to detain Cole when Trooper Chapman told Cole he was moving the traffic stop from the side of I-72 I-55 to the gas station at 10:16 into the recording, or less than 10 minutes into the traffic stop and clearly within the time reasonably needed to complete the traffic stop. By that time Trooper Chapman knew: (1) the Vehicle was registered to Cole only 21 days earlier and was insured only five days earlier, consistent with methods used by drug traffickers to avoid establishing a connection between a vehicle and a specific person; (2) the Vehicle was registered in Los Angeles, California, a known origin of illegal drug trafficking; (3) the Vehicle was a Volkswagen which could be equipped with hidden compartments to hold drugs; (4) Cole drove unusually slowly; (5) Cole extended his arms and tried to hide behind the pillar behind the driver’s seat when he passed Trooper Chapman’s Squad Car; (6) Cole was extremely nervous when Trooper Chapman stopped him and remained nervous throughout the traffic stop (Cole admitted his nervousness on the recording several times during the stop); (7) Cole gave a vague explanation for why he had an Arizona driver’s license, a car registered in California, and lived in Maryland; (8) Cole told a vague and improbable story that in only four or five days he was able to drive: (a) from Maryland to Cincinnati, Ohio “for a couple of days, work related,” (b) then to “the Springs” in Colorado to hook up with family, (c) then to a location outside Boulder, Colorado to see a friend, and (d) then to Springfield, Illinois on his way back to Maryland; (9) Cole changed the story from staying in Cincinnati for a “couple of days, work related,” to stopping in Cincinnati “just because I’m passing by;” (10) Cole also changed the story from meeting “family” at “the Springs” to meeting “family and friends,” and then to meeting up with some buddies because one of the guys was getting a divorce; and (11) Cole hesitated, said “um” repeatedly, and shifted in his seat while answering questions. All of these factors either were consistent with drug trafficking or indicated that Cole was nervous and lying. Together, these factors constituted articulable facts that supported Trooper Chapman’s reasonable suspicion that Cole was engaged in criminal activity.

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.