United States v. Meigel Craddock, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20118

On Nov. 20, 2013, Officer Prichard observed a suspicious green Pontiac, learned it was stolen, and later saw Meigel Craddock standing about 50 feet from the parked stolen car.
Prichard approached Craddock, who appeared nervous and could not give an address; Prichard handcuffed and frisked him for weapons.
The frisk did not reveal a weapon, but Prichard felt and removed a key fob from Craddock’s pocket, then used it to unlock the stolen Pontiac.
After opening the car, Prichard saw a handgun on the floor; Craddock (a felon) was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and later designated an Armed Career Criminal under the ACCA.
Craddock moved to suppress the key fob and related evidence; the district court denied the motion, a jury convicted, and he received an ACCA sentence.
The Eighth Circuit reversed the denial of suppression, concluding the plain-feel seizure of the key fob exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry frisk, and vacated the conviction without reaching the ACCA sentencing issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the officer lawfully seized the key fob discovered during a Terry frisk	Craddock argued seizure exceeded Terry scope because the key fob’s incriminating nature was not immediately apparent on plain feel	Government argued frisk was lawful and items in plain touch may be seized; also raised expectation-of-privacy and inevitable-discovery defenses	Court held seizure violated Fourth Amendment—officer lacked probable cause from plain feel to associate the fob with the stolen car, so removal and inspection exceeded Terry frisk

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes stop-and-frisk reasonable suspicion standard)
Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (1993) (plain-feel rule: officer may seize only items whose incriminating nature is immediately apparent without further manipulation)
Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (1983) (probable cause requires practical probability that item is incriminating)
Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984) (inevitable discovery exception to exclusionary rule)
United States v. Janis, 387 F.3d 682 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
United States v. Hanlon, 401 F.3d 926 (8th Cir. 2005) (officers may suspect weapons when encountering suspected car thieves)
United States v. Rowland, 341 F.3d 774 (8th Cir. 2003) (discusses suspicion of weapons in car theft contexts)
United States v. Bustos-Torres, 396 F.3d 935 (8th Cir. 2005) (incriminating character must be immediately identifiable on plain feel)
United States v. Cowan, 674 F.3d 947 (8th Cir. 2012) (plain-feel seizure standard and probable cause to associate property with crime)
United States v. Bailey, 417 F.3d 873 (8th Cir. 2005) (hunch is insufficient for reasonable suspicion or probable cause)
United States v. Long, 797 F.3d 558 (8th Cir. 2015) (distinguishes expectation of privacy in vehicles vs. items on person)
United States v. $53,082 in U.S. Currency, 985 F.2d 245 (6th Cir. 1993) (recognizes expectation of privacy in items carried on one’s person)