United States v. Cardona-Vicente, 817 F.3d 823

On May 17, 2013, Officer Melvin Martínez stopped a Jeep Cherokee for a seatbelt violation; Cardona was the front-seat passenger.
Martínez walked to the front of the vehicle tactically and observed Cardona clutching a fanny pack around his waist in a manner the officer, based on experience, believed indicated a gun was inside; Cardona appeared nervous.
Martínez asked Cardona if he had a license to carry a firearm; Cardona gestured negatively/non-verbally.
Martínez told Cardona to exit the vehicle, touched the fanny pack, felt a firearm, and then the fanny pack was opened to reveal a .40 Glock, ammunition, cash, and baggies of cocaine; additional drugs were later found under the rear seat.
Cardona was indicted on two counts of possession with intent to distribute (cocaine, marijuana) and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. He moved to suppress the seized items and statements; the magistrate and district court denied suppression.
After a jury trial Cardona was convicted; on appeal the First Circuit affirmed, holding the frisk/search of the fanny pack was supported by reasonable suspicion that Cardona was armed and dangerous.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Legality of pat-frisk/touching of fanny pack	Cardona: officer had only a hunch and nervousness; clutching a fanny pack is insufficient to justify a search	Government: totality (manner of clutching, officer experience, evasive nonverbal response about firearm license, nervousness) gave particularized suspicion that he was armed and dangerous	Court: Affirms denial—under totality officer had reasonable suspicion to believe Cardona was armed and dangerous and to touch the fanny pack
Suppression of evidence/statements as fruit of an unlawful search	Cardona: items and statements were fruits of unconstitutional frisk and must be suppressed	Government: search and seizure lawful so evidence/statements admissible	Court: Evidence and statements admissible because the pat-frisk/search was lawful

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes standards for investigatory stops and limited frisks for officer safety)
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (frisk during traffic stop requires reasonable suspicion person is armed and dangerous)
United States v. Romain, 393 F.3d 63 (1st Cir.) (frisk reasonableness assessed by what officer reasonably believed based on experience)
United States v. McKoy, 428 F.3d 38 (1st Cir.) (mere nervousness and reaching insufficient to support frisk)
United States v. Camacho, 661 F.3d 718 (1st Cir.) (fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine applies when initial search is unconstitutional)
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (courts must give deference to trained officers’ inferences from factual minutiae)