United States v. Jose Pacheco, 841 F.3d 384

Officers received a confidential tip that two Hispanic men in a silver Lincoln Aviator would be moving medium-to-large quantities of narcotics in the Kimberly Parkway area that evening; Detective Best met the source in person and then conducted surveillance.
Within 45 minutes Best observed a silver Lincoln Aviator exit the target complex with two Hispanic-appearing male occupants; he relayed the tip and a traffic infraction (failure to signal) to uniformed officers Phalen and Trivette.
Phalen and Trivette stopped the Aviator after witnessing it swerve across double-yellow lines; they removed the driver (no license, shaking) and then addressed Pacheco, the passenger.
Trivette observed Pacheco being extremely nervous, avoiding eye contact, rummaging in the glove box, looking at the floorboard/center console, and initially failing to obey commands to exit the vehicle; Trivette asked him out and then performed a protective pat-down.
During the pat-down Trivette felt a large amount of cash in Pacheco’s right cargo pocket and a brick-like, wrapped object protruding from the left cargo pocket; based on size, packaging, and feel he recognized it as brick cocaine and seized it along with the cash.
Pacheco moved to suppress the cocaine and currency, arguing the frisk lacked reasonable suspicion; the district court denied the motion and this appeal followed after a conditional guilty plea.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officer had reasonable suspicion to perform a Terry frisk for weapons	Pacheco: Trivette lacked specific, articulable facts that Pacheco was armed; nervousness and presence in a suspected narcotics vehicle are insufficient	Government: Tip corroboration, nighttime/high-crime area, Pacheco’s heightened nervousness, furtive movements, failure to follow commands, and looking toward common weapon-concealment areas gave reasonable suspicion	Court: Frisk justified under totality of circumstances; corroborated tip + behavior + contextual factors supplied reasonable suspicion
Whether contraband seized during the pat-down was lawfully seized under plain-view/plain-feel	Pacheco: Seizure exceeded a protective frisk; incriminating nature of object was not immediately apparent	Government: Officer was lawfully positioned, felt and saw packaging consistent with brick cocaine; incriminating nature was immediately apparent given training and experience	Court: Seizure lawful under plain-feel/plain-view — packaging, size, feel, and Pacheco’s statement made contraband immediately apparent

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes stop-and-frisk standard requiring reasonable suspicion that a person is armed and dangerous)
Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (frisk may accompany a Terry stop when reasonable suspicion exists)
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (plain-feel doctrine: contraband may be seized during lawful frisk if incriminating nature is immediately apparent)
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (subjective intent of officers irrelevant when a traffic violation provides objective justification for stop)
Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (officers may order passengers out of vehicle during a traffic stop)
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (passengers are seized under the Fourth Amendment during a traffic stop)
United States v. Noble, 762 F.3d 509 (6th Cir. 2014) (frisk unjustified where nervousness and vehicle suspicion alone lacked corroborative factors)
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (totality-of-the-circumstances analysis for reasonable suspicion; caution against divide-and-conquer)
Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (corroboration of an informant’s tip can lend indicia of reliability for reasonable suspicion)
Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (training and experience may inform officers’ inferences about items in plain view)
United States v. Garcia, 496 F.3d 495 (6th Cir. 2007) (factors for assessing whether an object’s incriminating nature is immediately apparent)