2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 5-25-2010 

# U SA v . T o dd S ewell P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 09-3527

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . T odd S ewell " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1269. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1269NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

____________ N o. 09- 3527

____________ UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. TOD D A LLEN SEW ELL, A ppel l ant

____________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . N o. 08- cr - 00090) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e M aur i ce B. C ohi l l , J uni or

____________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ay19, 2010 B e f o re : F U E N T E S , H A R D IM A N a n d N Y G A A R D , C i r cui tJudges .

( Fi l ed: M ay25, 2010 )

____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________

H A R D IM A N , C i r cui tJudge .T he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 18 U . S. C . § 3231, and w e have 1 j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1291. 2 T od d S ew el l app eal s an order of t he D i stri ctC ou rtden y i ng his m oti on t o sup press evi dence fol l ow i ng hi s condi t i onal gui l t ypl ea t o vi ol at i ng 18 U . S. C . §§ 922( g) ( 1) and 9 2 4 ( e ) ( f e l o n i n p o s s e s s i o n o f

a f i r e a r m) . W e wi l l a f

f i r m. 1 I. B eca us e w e w r i t e fort he part i es , w e r ecountonl ythos e fa ct s nece s s aryt o our decis i on . W e revi ew t he D i stri ctC ou rt ’s fi nd i ng s of fact for cl ear error , and exerci se pl enaryr evi ew overi t s det erm i nat i on t hatr eas onabl e s us pi ci on j us t i fi ed a Ter r y s t op of S e w e ll. U

ni t ed Stat es v. R ober t

s on , 9 0 F . 3 d 7 5 , 7 6 -77 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) (cit ati o n o m itted). A l though t he part i es di s put e s om e of the fa ct s l eadi ng up t o t he di s coveryof the g u n p o sses sed b yS ew ell , the f o ll o w ing g en era l fac ts fo u n d b ythe D istri ct C o u rtare undi s put ed. O ffi cerJ oy ce M cC l el l and, a 20- y earvet er an of the Pi t t s bur gh Pol i ce D epart m ent , w as on patr ol i n a mar ked s quad ca rj us tpas tm i dni ghton D ece m ber25, 2 0 0 6 . Of

f i c e rM c Cl e l l a n d wa s o n F i f t h Av e n u e i n P i t t s b u r g h ’ s Hi l l Di s t r i c t , a h i g h - c r i me ar ea, w hen s he hea r d a r adi o cal l of s hot s fi r ed verycl os e by

— i n t he vi ci ni t yof the 200 b lo c k o f D in w id d ie S tre e t. M o m e n ts la ter , M c C lella n d sa w S e w e ll ap p ro a c h in g F if th A v e n u e o n D in w id d ie S tre e t o n f o o t, co m in g f

ro m th e d ire c tio n w h e re th e sh o ts r epor t edl yhad bee n fi r ed. Sew el l r an orj ogged ac r os s Fi fth A venue i n fr ontof M cC l el l and’ s car , t hen s l ow ed t o a w al k, l ooked atM cC l el l and’ s car , and nervous l yput3

h is h a n d s in h is p o c k e ts. M c C lella n d d e c id e d to c o n d u c t an in v e stig a to rysto p o f S e w e ll, w hi ch l ed hert o di s covert he gun i n hi s pos s es s i on. Sew el l ar gues t hatM cC l el l and’ s obs ervat i ons gave he rno r eas on t o s us pecthe had d o n e a n yth in g w ro n g , re n d e ri n g th e in v e s tig a to ry st o p in v a lid u n d e r t h e C o n s titu tio n . T h e S u p re m e C o u rt h a s h e ld th a t “a n o f f ice r m a y , co n sis ten t w ith th e F o u rth A m e n d m e n t, conducta br i ef, i nves t i gat or ys t op w hen the off i cerhas a r eas onabl e, ar t i cul abl e s us pi ci on thatcr i m i nal act i vi t yi s afoot . ” I l l i nois v. W

ar dl ow , 528 U . S. 119, 123 ( 2000) ( ci t i ng T e rr y v . O h io , 392 U . S. 1, 30 ( 1968) ) . T o j us t i fya T erry sto p , p o lice m u st re a so n a b ly s us pectnotonl yt hata cr i m e has been ori s bei ng comm i t t ed, butal s o “thatthe part i cul ar i ndi vi dual bei ng s t opped i s engage d i n w r ongdoi ng. ” U ni t ed Stat es v. C or t ez , 44 9 U. S. 411, 418 ( 1981) . T he r equi s i t e “l evel of s us pi ci on i s cons i der abl yl es s than pr oof of w r ongdoi ng bya pr eponder ance of the evi dence . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. Sokol ow , 490 U . S. 1, 7 (19 8 9 ). I n det erm i ni ng w hetherr eas onabl e s us pi ci on of thi s type exi s t s , “the t ot al i t yof the ci r cumst ance s — t he w hol e pi ctur e— m us tbe t aken i nt o acc ount . ” C or t ez , 449 U . S. at 4 1 7 . E v e n a se rie s o f

law f u l ac ts o r o c c u rre n c e s m a y , tak e n to g e th e r, cr e a te a re a so n a b le s u s p ic io n th a t a c ri m e is b e in g o r h a s b e e n c o m m itte d . W ar dl ow , 528 U . S. at125 ( ci t i ng T erry , 392 U . S. at5- 6, 30) . A n i ndi vi dual ’ s “nervous , evas i ve beha vi ori s a pert i nent fac t or , ” W

ar dl ow , 528 U . S. at124 ( ci t at i ons om i t t ed) , as i s the t i m e of da yatw hi ch the e n c o u n te r o c c u rs , i d. a t1 2 9 . P o l i c e o f f i c e r s a r e p e r mi t t e d t o “ d r a w o n th e i ro wn4

exper i ence and s peci al i zed tr ai ni ng t o m ake i nfer ence s fr om and deduc t i ons aboutthe cu m u lat ive in fo rm ati o n av ail ab le t o them that ‘m igh t w ell elud e a n u n tr aine d p erso n . ’” U nited S tates v. A rvi

zu , 534 U . S. 266, 273 ( 2002) ( quot i ng C or t ez , 4 4 9 U . S . at 41 8 ). H er e, i n t he w ee hour s of C hr i s t m as m orni ng, and w i t hi n m om ent s of hea r i ng a r epor tt hatguns hot s had bee n fi r ed nea rby , O ffi cerM cC l el l and s aw Sew el l comi ng fr om the veryl ocal e w her e the s hot s had bee n fi r ed. Sew el l hurr i ed ac r os s the s t r eeti n fr ontof M cC l el l and, t hen s l ow ed t o a w al k and nervous l ygl ance d backw ar d and pl ace d hi s hands in h is p o c k e ts. W e a g re e w ith th e D istric t C o u rt th a t th e se f a c ts c re a ted re a so n a b le suspi ci on t hat Sew el l had been i nv olved i n the r epo rt ed g un shots . O u r c o n c lu sio n is g u id e d b yo u r d e c isio n in U ni t ed Stat es v. G oodr i ch , 450 F. 3d 552 ( 3d C i r . 2006) . I n G oodr i ch , pol i ce r es ponded t o a ci t i zen’ s r epor tat11: 20 p. m . t hat “tw o peopl e j us tcarr y i ng s om e ki nd of bucke t s ors om ethi ng” w er e s t eal i ng anhy dr ous a m m o n ia , i d. at560, and w er e “ove rbehi nd R & M G as r i ghtnow l oadi ng i nt o s om e ki nd of vehi cl e, ” i d. a t 5 6 2 . W h e n p o lice p ro c e e d e d to th e v icin ity , the ysa w o n e v e h icle ( G oodr i ch’ s ) w i t hi n a bl ock ort w o of the gas s t at i on and s t opped i tabouts even mi nut es a f te r t h e re p o rt is s u e d . I

d. a t 5 6 2 -6 3 . W e h e ld th e sto p w a s s u p p o rte d b yre a so n a b le ar t i cul abl e s us pi ci on, ci t i ng fourkeyfac t or s : “( 1) the r eput at i on of the ar ea i n w hi ch the s t op occurr ed forcr i m i nal act i vi t y ; ( 2) the t i m e of da y ; ( 3) the geogr aphi cal and t empora l p ro x im ityo f

th e sto p to th e sc e n e o f th e a lleg e d c rim e ; an d (4 ) th e n u m b e r o f p e rso n s in the ar ea, ” i d. at561.5

L i ke G oo dri ch, S ew el l w as st op ped l at e atnighti n a h i gh -cr i m e area, i n close geogr aphi cal and t empora l pr oxi m i t yt o a cr i m e. U nl i ke i n G oodr i ch , the D istri ct C o u rt m ade no f

i ndi ngs as t o t he numberof otherpeopl e i n t he ar ea w her e Sew el l w as s t opped, and the r ecor d evi dence i s i nconcl us i ve on thi s ques t i on. N evert hel es s , O ffi cer M c C lella n d w a s p re se n ted w ith a d d iti o n a l in d icia o f su sp icio n th a t w e re n o t p re se n t in G oodr i ch : s he obs erved Sew el l run orj og acr os s the s t r eet , aw ayfr om the s cene of the s hoot i ng, and then begi n act i ng nervous l yatr oughl ythe s ame t i m e he not i ced he rpol i ce car . I n addi t i on, M cC l el l and’ s obs ervat i on of Sew el l w as farm or e pr oxi m at e i n t i m e than the s even mi nut es t hatel aps ed i n G oodr i ch . A ccor di ngl y , w e hol d t hatthe for egoi ng fac t s s uffi ced a s a mat t erof l aw t o j us t i fya T erry s t op. Sew el l m akes m uch of the fa ctthatO ffi cerM cC l el l and di d nothave a des cr i pt i on o f th e s h o o te r a t th e tim e s h e s to p p e d h im . G oodr i ch dem on strat es the u np ers uasi ven ess of thi s ar gum ent . T he pol i ce i n G oodr i ch w ere init ial lytold o n lythat the s u sp ec ts w ere tw o p e o p le w ith b u c k e ts, a n d th e yh a d n o d e sc rip tio n o f G o o d ric h ’s v e h icle o r its occupa nt s att he t i m e theyi ni t i at ed the Ter r y s t op. N evert hel es s , w e hel d t hatther e w as re a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n to s to p th e v e h ic le b a s e d o n th e re m a in d e r o f th e c ir c u m s ta n c e s . S e w e ll cite s n o c a se — n o r a re w e a w a re o f o n e — th a t sta n d s f

o r th e p ro p o sitio n th a t a phy s i cal des cr i pt i on of a s us pecti s a pr er equi s i t e t o a T erry s t op. A l t hough O ffi cer M cC l el l and had no de s cr i pt i on of Sew el l , the otherfac t or s w e have not ed pr ovi ded r eas onabl e art i cul abl e s us pi ci on forhert o per form an i nves t i gat orys t op.6

Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e fi nd no err ori n t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s deni al of Sew el l ’ s s uppr es s i on m ot i on and w e w i l l aff i r m hi s j udgm entof convi ct i on.