Toms
United States v. Toms
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Officer Shearer responded to a 9-1-1 call by an informant who was neither the victim of a crime nor an insider with information about criminal activity. See United States v. Terry-Crespo, 356 F.3d 1170, 1172 (9th Cir.2004). The informant, a Rite Aid store manager, expressed concern about a man sitting in a car with no license plates in the parking lot of her store. Other than the car having no license plates, the report contained no information that was objectively suspicious. See United States v. Rojas-Millan, 234 F.3d 464, 468-69 (9th Cir.2000).
It is undisputed that Toms was seized the moment Officer Shearer arrived on the scene and ordered him out of his vehicle. See Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434 , 111 S.Ct. 2382 , 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991). At that point, the officer had not yet corroborated all of the details in the informant’s report, including whether the car had license plates. In any event, the government does not rely on the lack of license plates in asserting that Officer Shearer had reasonable suspicion to detain Toms, and for good reason: The subsequent arrest report states that the car did, in fact, have a license plate. At the time Toms was…