United States v. Janhoi Cole
994 F.3d 844
| 7th Cir. | 2021Background
- Trooper Chapman stopped Janhoi Cole on Interstate 72 for allegedly following another car too closely after a deputy radioed a suspicious vehicle; the stop was pretextual for drug interdiction.
- Initial roadside encounter lasted about 10 minutes (≈8.5 minutes in the cruiser); Chapman spent roughly 6 minutes asking Cole about residence, employment, itinerary, and vehicle matters unrelated to the traffic infraction.
- Chapman told Cole he would issue a warning but insisted they relocate to a gas station (citing safety); en route Chapman requested a drug‑sniffing dog; at the gas station Chapman waited ≈10 more minutes for the dog, which alerted and led to discovery of kilograms of methamphetamine and heroin in a hidden compartment.
- Cole moved to suppress the evidence arguing (1) the stop lacked a lawful basis and (2) the stop was unlawfully prolonged under Rodriguez v. United States; the magistrate judge credited the trooper, the district court denied suppression, and Cole pleaded guilty reserving this appeal.
- The Seventh Circuit majority assumed probable cause to stop for tailgating but held Chapman unconstitutionally prolonged the stop by using several minutes to ask unrelated itinerary/personal questions without reasonable, articulable suspicion; it reversed the denial of suppression and remanded to allow Cole to withdraw his plea.
- Judge St. Eve dissented, arguing reasonable suspicion developed within nine minutes from Cole’s evasive/inconsistent travel story, nervousness, and insurance timing, so prolongation for a dog sniff was justified.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Cole) | Defendant's Argument (Government/Chapman) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of initial stop (tailgating) | No observed traffic violation; stop unlawful from outset | Trooper reasonably observed tailgating; probable cause supported stop | Court assumed stop lawful and did not overturn district court’s finding (probable cause to stop) |
| Whether roadside questioning impermissibly prolonged the stop (Rodriguez) | Trooper used ~6 minutes to ask unrelated itinerary/personal questions, unlawfully prolonging detention | Itinerary and travel questions normally fall within a stop’s mission; Lewis and other precedents permit such queries if they do not measurably extend the stop | Majority: questioning prolonged the stop without reasonable suspicion and violated the Fourth Amendment; evidence suppressed and denial of suppression reversed |
| Whether reasonable suspicion arose during the initial encounter to justify further detention | No—at outset officer had only a hunch based on a tip; innocuous facts do not make suspicion reasonable | Yes—Cole’s inconsistent travel story, nervousness, and recent insurance purchase generated reasonable suspicion within ~9 minutes | Majority: reasonable suspicion did not exist during the initial roadside questioning; dissent: it did (disagreement of fact and legal weight) |
| Remedy and procedural effect | Suppress evidence and allow withdrawal of plea | Evidence admissible; suppression denied | Majority: reverse denial of suppression and remand so Cole may withdraw his guilty plea; dissent would affirm conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (officer may not prolong traffic stop beyond mission absent reasonable suspicion)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (pretextual stops lawful if officer has probable cause for traffic violation)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable‑suspicion standard for brief investigatory stops)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (stop lawful at inception but cannot be prolonged beyond mission)
- United States v. Lewis, 920 F.3d 483 (7th Cir. 2019) (itinerary questions permissible when they do not measurably extend the stop and officer is completing paperwork)
- United States v. Simon, 937 F.3d 820 (7th Cir. 2019) (officer’s reasonable belief that a traffic infraction occurred suffices to pull vehicle over)
- United States v. Lopez, 907 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2018) (suppressing evidence where questioning prolonged seizure without justification)
- United States v. Childs, 277 F.3d 947 (7th Cir. 2002) (questioning that prolongs detention beyond stop’s mission is unreasonable)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (reasonable‑suspicion inquiry uses totality of circumstances)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014) (suspicion must be particularized and objective)