United States v. Awer, 770 F.3d 83

Officer stops Malibu for speeding; Johnson_is driver, Awer is passenger, Simmons in back; Johnson admits no license; Awer claims rental car from NY; cocaine found in trunk during inventory search after tow; Johnson later provides handwritten statements blaming herself; Johnson murdered before trial; district court denied suppression and admitted statements; trial featured officer testimony on rights waiver and an expert's ‘slam-dunk’ comment; jury convicted Awer; sentenced to 20 years after long post-trial proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Fourth Amendment suppression proper?	Awer argues the stop and detainment exceeded permissible scope.	Awer contends the stop and follow-up were lawful and supported by reasonable suspicion.	No suppression; reasonable suspicion supported continued investigation.
Was there a de facto arrest requiring probable cause?	Awer asserts removal from car amounted to unlawful arrest.	Detention remained a lawful stop; force proportionate.	Not a de facto arrest; any force was reasonable and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Admissibility of Johnson's statements to her lawyers under Rule 804(b)(3) or Rule 807	Prosecution claimed such statements could be admitted.	Statements were confidential or not more probative than written statements.	District court properly excluded under Rule 804(b)(3) and 807; privilege and cumulative issues control.
Impact of trial improper statements on mistrial decision	Prosecutor's and expert's remarks could prejudice the jury.	Mistrial warranted due to cumulative prejudice.	No manifest abuse of discretion; curative instructions sufficed and no mistrial warranted.
Whether the expert’s “confession” label and other remarks tainted trial	Such labeling and remarks could mislead jurors about voluntariness.	Instructions cured error; remarks were not seriously prejudicial.	No reversible error given prompt curative instructions and lack of substantial prejudice.

Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (passenger may be detained during lawful traffic stop without reasonable suspicion)
Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997) (police may order occupants out of a vehicle during a traffic stop)
United States v. Chaney, 584 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2009) (minimal level of objective justification supports stop continuation)
United States v. McKoy, 428 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2005) (nervousness and furtive movements in high-crime area may be insufficient for Terry frisk)
United States v. Zapata, 18 F.3d 971 (1st Cir. 1994) (de facto arrest analysis; moment of detention")
United States v. Pontoo, 666 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2011) (force used in detentions; not always de facto arrest)