## Facts

- Indiana law barred drivers from “typing, transmitting, or reading” text messages or emails while driving, but allowed many other cellphone uses (e.g., calls, GPS, music, internet, video).
- On an interstate, an officer saw Gregorio Paniagua-Garcia holding a cellphone, looking down at it, and manipulating it, and concluded he “appeared to be texting.”
- Paniagua-Garcia later stated he was searching for music; the government ultimately conceded he was not texting, and the phone showed no texting at the relevant time.
- The officer stopped the vehicle, questioned Paniagua-Garcia, obtained consent to search the car, and found about five pounds of heroin hidden in the spare tire in the trunk.
- Paniagua-Garcia was charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute in federal court.
- He moved to suppress the heroin as the product of an unconstitutional stop; the district court denied suppression, and he entered a conditional guilty plea and received a 36-month sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether an officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop a driver for violating a no-texting statute when the observed cellphone handling is equally consistent with multiple lawful uses expressly permitted by the statute.
2. If the stop lacked lawful justification, whether the heroin discovered after the stop and consent search must be suppressed under the Fourth Amendment.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit reversed the denial of the motion to suppress.
- The court held the officer lacked probable cause and lacked reasonable suspicion that Paniagua-Garcia was texting in violation of Indiana law.
- Because the stop violated the Fourth Amendment, the heroin discovered as a result of the stop and ensuing search should have been suppressed.

## Legal Principles

- Probable cause and reasonable suspicion require, at minimum, a nontrivial probability that a specific law is being violated based on articulable facts.
- When a statute criminalizes a narrow subset of conduct involving a common device, an officer must identify facts that distinguish the illegal subset from the broad range of lawful uses.
- Observations that are equally consistent with lawful conduct permitted by the statute do not create reasonable suspicion or probable cause for a traffic stop.
- Evidence obtained as a result of an unconstitutional stop is subject to suppression.

## Conclusion

Because the officer observed only generic cellphone manipulation that did not distinguish illegal texting from numerous lawful activities allowed while driving, the stop lacked reasonable suspicion and probable cause; the Fourth Amendment required suppression of the heroin found during the subsequent search.


United States v. Paniagua-Garcia, 813 F.3d 1013 (7th Cir. 2016)