United States v. Tom, 988 F.3d 95

DEA investigated Denis Ochan after controlled buys; agents conducted a buy/bust on Feb. 2, 2017, using an audio-equipped confidential informant.
A green Chevy Cruze with a New York plate drove to the rear of Ochan’s three‑family residence shortly before the planned buy; an individual emerged from the rear, later left the building with Ochan, and Ochan then sold crack to the informant and was arrested.
A search of Ochan produced approximately four grams of crack and $530; the Chevy left the residence minutes after these events.
Portland police later stopped the Chevy downtown; officers ordered the occupants (Tom was the passenger) out, found cocaine on the seat and on both occupants, and arrested them.
Tom was indicted for possession with intent to distribute, moved to suppress the drugs and cash (arguing the stop/search lacked reasonable suspicion), pled guilty while reserving the right to appeal the suppression denial, and was sentenced to 84 months.
The district court denied the suppression motion, finding officers had reasonable suspicion independent of any statements by Ochan; the First Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to approach/stop the Chevy and order occupants out	No reasonable suspicion; any link depended on Ochan’s statements, which were unreliable	Surveillance sequence, prior controlled buys, Chevy’s timing/behavior, and drugs/cash found on Ochan created an articulable link to the Chevy independent of Ochan’s statements	Court: Reasonable suspicion existed; suppression denial affirmed
Whether officers’ delay (acting after Ochan’s interrogation) vitiates reasonable suspicion	Officers only acted after eliciting incriminating statements, so stop rested on unreliable hearsay	Officers need not act the instant suspicion arises; objective reasonableness controls, and ongoing investigation is permitted	Court: Delay does not negate reasonable suspicion; subjective intent irrelevant

Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (tests de novo review of legal conclusions and accepts reasonable inferences)
Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (subjective intent of officers irrelevant to Fourth Amendment reasonableness)
United States v. Tiru‑Plaza, 766 F.3d 111 (1st Cir. 2014) (traffic stops require reasonable, articulable suspicion)
United States v. Chhien, 266 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2001) (reasonable‑suspicion standard explained)
United States v. Jones, 700 F.3d 615 (1st Cir. 2012) (standards for informant reliability and use of hearsay in reasonable‑suspicion analysis)
New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (reasonable suspicion requires probability, not certainty)
United States v. Mayendía‑Blanco, 905 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2018) (courts may resolve cases on the simplest dispositive ground)
Sokolow v. United States, 490 U.S. 1 (totality of the circumstances governs reasonable‑suspicion inquiries)