United States v. Rosario
1:24-cr-00497
S.D.N.Y.Apr 22, 2025Background
- DEA began investigating a homicide at an apartment used for drug distribution in November 2023, linking Abel Rosario to the site via his cellphone.
- Surveillance of Rosario and associate Bianneury Pena followed, with several observed trips from North Carolina to New York involving heavy bags.
- On June 7, 2024, DEA agents detained Rosario, Pena, and another individual after observing them disembark a bus carrying heavy bags in Manhattan.
- A sniffer dog (Stuey) and his handler immediately conducted a canine search of the seized bags, both of which tested positive for narcotics odors.
- Agents obtained a search warrant for the bags, discovering firearms and ammunition. Pena was later indicted for firearms trafficking conspiracy.
- Pena moved to suppress the evidence, claiming his stop lacked reasonable suspicion and escalated to an illegal arrest without probable cause.
Issues
| Issue | Pena's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was reasonable suspicion for the stop | No specific facts or articulable suspicion justified stopping Pena | Totality of circumstances and observations gave rise to reasonable suspicion | Stop was justified |
| Whether the stop was a de facto arrest requiring probable cause | His handcuffing and detention were tantamount to arrest without probable cause | Detention and handcuffing were brief, necessary, and not unreasonably intrusive | No de facto arrest; detention was lawful |
| Validity of canine sniff and reliance on alert | Dog only alerted to Rosario's bag, not Pena's | Dog reliably alerted to both bags, including Pena's, as shown at hearing | Court found canine alert to both bags |
| Lawfulness of subsequent search and seizure | Evidence should be suppressed as fruit of unlawful detention/search | Search warrant was supported by probable cause from canine sniff | Search and seizure were lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (investigatory stop permissible on reasonable suspicion, not requiring probable cause)
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (reasonable suspicion assessed under totality of the circumstances)
- United States v. Bailey, 743 F.3d 322 (reasonableness of stop assessed by available means and context)
- United States v. Lefebvre, 117 F.4th 471 (factors to distinguish Terry stop from de facto arrest)
- United States v. Tehrani, 49 F.3d 54 (no set time converts stop to arrest; reasonableness is key)
- United States v. Patterson, 25 F.4th 123 (duration of stop must be necessary to confirm/dispel suspicion)