989 F.3d 548
7th Cir.2021Background
- Police responded to a report of a homeless person living in a white Kia SUV behind a Goodwill in Eau Claire, WI; officers found Joshua Reedy in the front passenger seat wearing a bulletproof vest and observed a walkie‑talkie, crowbar, and open hunting knife in the vehicle.
- Reedy said his friend “Jason” had walked to a nearby neighborhood; officers ordered Reedy not to leave while they searched for Jason and then checked the car (Reedy was patted down and not found armed).
- Within ~20–40 minutes officers located Jason Harding in a nearby backyard; he wore dress clothes, had a walkie‑talkie tuned to the same channel, and consented to a backpack search that revealed methamphetamine, credit cards in other names, bolt cutters, knives, shotgun shells, latex gloves, and other incriminating items.
- Harding was arrested for drug possession; returning officers searched the Kia and found a shotgun; Reedy (a convicted felon) was arrested for unlawful firearm possession and later confessed that the shotgun was his.
- Reedy moved to suppress the gun and his confession, arguing the detention became a de facto arrest when officers told him he could not leave; the district court denied suppression, Reedy pleaded guilty reserving appeal rights, and the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Reedy) | Defendant's Argument (Government/Police) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether initial encounter was an unlawful arrest (Terry stop vs. arrest) | Ordering Reedy not to leave made the encounter an arrest requiring probable cause | Officers had reasonable suspicion (vest, tools, walkie, Reedy’s story) to detain briefly under Terry | Court held detention was a lawful Terry stop supported by reasonable suspicion |
| Whether evidence from Harding’s encounter (and subsequent car search) was tainted by unlawful detention / whether probable cause existed to arrest and search | Any evidence obtained after the alleged arrest (Harding’s incriminating items, car search) cannot supply probable cause because initial detention was an arrest | Investigation of Harding reasonably and diligently pursued; facts learned provided probable cause for at least possession of burglarious tools and therefore lawful arrest and vehicle search incident to arrest | Court held officers developed probable cause during the investigation to arrest Reedy (at minimum for burglarious tools) and lawfully searched the vehicle under Gant’s second prong |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (established investigatory stop standard of reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (no bright‑line time limit; factual inquiry into stop duration)
- United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675 (stop duration judged by whether police diligently pursued means to confirm/dispel suspicion)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (permits vehicle search incident to arrest if arrestee within reach or vehicle may contain evidence of the offense)
- Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (probable cause assessed from facts known to arresting officer)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (an arrest may be supported by probable cause for any offense supported by facts)
- United States v. Leo, 792 F.3d 742 (7th Cir.) (framework for when a Terry stop must end)
- United States v. Bullock, 632 F.3d 1004 (7th Cir.) (multiple‑officer Terry stops and duration analysis)
- Rabin v. Flynn, 725 F.3d 628 (7th Cir.) (90‑minute stop reasonable where officers diligently verified firearm license)
- Dollard v. Whisenand, 946 F.3d 342 (7th Cir.) (probable cause for intent can rest on reasonable inferences from facts)