964 F.3d 876
9th Cir.2020Background
- Late-night 911 call from a Nica Lounge employee ("Witness 2") reporting that three patrons had just seen a man with a pistol "on him" in the bar’s parking lot; Witness 2 gave his name, position, and phone number and called from the bar.
- Witness 2 described the man ("Latin," blue Warriors sweatshirt, skinny, early 20s), observed the man in real time as he ran and entered a black four-door Crown Victoria, and directed officers to follow that vehicle.
- Dispatch broadcast the report: multiple patrons believed they saw a Hispanic male in a blue sweatshirt carrying a pistol; officers executed a high-risk car stop of the vehicle identified by Witness 2.
- Officers searched the car during the stop and found a loaded semi-automatic handgun under the center console; defendant Shane Vandergroen (a felon) was arrested and charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- Vandergroen moved to suppress the gun evidence, arguing the 911 tip did not give reasonable suspicion to stop him; the district court denied suppression; Vandergroen pleaded guilty at a stipulated-facts bench trial and appealed the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 911 call supplied reasonable suspicion to stop Vandergroen | The 911 call was reliable: identified caller, caller used 911, reported fresh eyewitness observations from multiple patrons, and described potentially unlawful concealed-carry conduct under California law, justifying an immediate stop | The tip lacked sufficient reliability and indicia of illegality (anonymous third‑party reporting; akin to Brown), so it did not create reasonable suspicion | Court affirmed: the call was sufficiently reliable and reported presumptively unlawful, ongoing conduct (concealed weapon), so reasonable suspicion supported the stop |
Key Cases Cited
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (2014) (tip‑based reasonable‑suspicion framework for investigative stops)
- Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000) (anonymous tip reliability limits; known informants more credible)
- United States v. Rowland, 464 F.3d 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (consideration of basis-of-knowledge and indicia of reliability for tips)
- Foster v. City of Indio, 908 F.3d 1204 (9th Cir. 2018) (911 calls and eyewitness, detailed descriptions increase tip reliability)
- United States v. Terry-Crespo, 356 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2004) (fresh, firsthand reports strengthen anonymous-tip reliability)
- United States v. Brown, 925 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 2019) (distinguishing tips that lack reliability and absence of presumptively unlawful conduct)
- United States v. Grigg, 498 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2007) (seriousness/ongoing nature of reported conduct relevant to justification for immediate detention)