United States v. Tanguay, 918 F.3d 1

Shortly after midnight, Officer Adam Rayho approached an SUV parked alone in a Nashua, NH strip‑mall lot; he pulled his marked cruiser 7–10 feet behind it, illuminated the interior with a flashlight, and activated rear-facing blue lights.
Rayho asked the occupants (Eric Tanguay and a passenger, Jacqueline) their names and for identification; they initially said they had no ID and Tanguay said he did not own the SUV.
Rayho ran a records check after obtaining Tanguay’s verbal permission to return to his cruiser; while doing so he observed Jacqueline reach under the passenger seat and returned to the SUV to ask for ID again.
When Tanguay opened his door to retrieve a backpack in the trunk, Rayho saw the butt of a gun in the driver‑side door; Rayho retrieved the license from the trunk, observed $2,800 cash and a padlocked backpack, and verified the firearm was a BB gun.
Tanguay consented to a vehicle search; officers found a loaded syringe, a pill, and Narcan; Rayho arrested Tanguay and later obtained consent to search the padlocked backpack at the station, discovering fentanyl, methamphetamine, pills, a scale, baggies, and mail addressed to Tanguay.
Tanguay was indicted under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), moved to suppress arguing lack of reasonable suspicion, preserved the claim via a conditional guilty plea, and appealed the denial of suppression.

Issue	Tanguay's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether the initial interaction became a Fourth Amendment seizure (a Terry stop) before reasonable suspicion arose	Rayho’s approach, lighting, activation of cruiser lights, questions, and asking for ID constituted a show of authority that seized Tanguay before any reasonable suspicion existed	The encounter was consensual until Tanguay failed to produce ID and denied ownership; officer conduct before that point did not objectively convey a command to stay	No seizure occurred before reasonable suspicion; court affirmed no Fourth Amendment violation
Whether officer had reasonable suspicion to justify a Terry stop and subsequent investigatory measures	Rayho lacked reasonable suspicion early on and thus the later search and evidence should be suppressed	Tanguay’s inability to produce ID plus admission he was not the owner justified reasonable suspicion that the vehicle might be stolen; subsequent actions (records check, ordering passenger out, verifying weapon, obtaining consent) were within Terry scope	Court held reasonable suspicion arose when Tanguay failed to produce ID/denied ownership; officer actions remained within Terry bounds and evidence was admissible

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes investigatory stop standard)
Mendenhall v. United States, 446 U.S. 544 (tests seizure via show of authority; "free to leave" inquiry)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (permits suspicionless questioning and requests for ID so long as no coercive message is conveyed)
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (officer’s subjective motive irrelevant to reasonable suspicion inquiry)
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 177 (officer may request identification in ordinary course)
Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (use of lights can convey command; context matters)
Fields v. United States, 823 F.3d 20 (First Circuit on when show of authority constitutes a seizure)
United States v. Cardoza, 129 F.3d 6 (approach/questioning does not automatically equal seizure)
United States v. Taylor, 511 F.3d 87 (approaching a parked car and questioning occupant does not necessarily create a Terry stop)