United States v. Briggs, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13488

Officers in an unmarked but identifiable Tulsa police vehicle spotted Nathan Briggs and a companion walking in a high‑crime neighborhood; both changed direction and increased their pace when they saw the car.
Briggs repeatedly looked over his shoulder and grabbed at his waistline as the officers approached; the companion split off toward a house and knocked on the door.
After officers exited the vehicle and asked to speak with them, Briggs backpedaled and his companion fled; an officer then drew his weapon, ordered Briggs not to run, Briggs said he had a gun, and officers handcuffed him and recovered a .40‑caliber pistol.
Briggs was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm, moved to suppress the gun as the fruit of an unconstitutional seizure, and reserved an appeal when he pled guilty.
The district court denied suppression, finding no single factor alone justified a stop but that the totality of circumstances furnished reasonable suspicion; the Tenth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Briggs' Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether Officer Cannon had reasonable suspicion to detain Briggs (Terry stop)	Detention was based on an inarticulate hunch; Briggs’ movement was lawful walking away, not an obvious attempt to evade	Totality (high‑crime area, change of direction/speed, waist reaching, backpedaling, companion’s flight, nervousness) gave particularized, objective suspicion	Held: Detention reasonable — the combined factors justified an investigative stop

United States v. Marquez, 337 F.3d 1203 (10th Cir. 2003) (standard for reviewing suppression‑motion facts)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (investigative stop requires reasonable suspicion)
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (flight and evasive behavior are relevant to reasonable suspicion)
Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (reasonable‑suspicion inquiry must be particularized and objective)
United States v. Neff, 681 F.3d 1134 (10th Cir. 2012) (apply totality of circumstances to Terry analysis)
United States v. McHugh, 639 F.3d 1250 (10th Cir. 2011) (deference to officer experience; totality of circumstances)
United States v. De La Cruz, 703 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2013) (flight of another may not implicate driver absent additional indicia)
United States v. Davis, 94 F.3d 1465 (10th Cir. 1996) (presence in a known area and breaking eye contact insufficient alone for stop)
United States v. DeJear, 552 F.3d 1196 (10th Cir. 2009) (furtive movements and other factors can support reasonable suspicion)
United States v. Guardado, 699 F.3d 1220 (10th Cir. 2012) (grasping waistline can be probative of weapon concealment)
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (officer authority during traffic stops and assessing suspicious behavior)
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (scope of searches incident to arrest)

(Note: the opinion also cites other Supreme Court and circuit precedents explaining reasonable‑suspicion and totality analyses.)