The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ambrose, Chief District Judge.
FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW and ORDER OF COURT
1. On October 2, 2006, while on stationary patrol, Pennsylvania State Trooper Maurer was notified by an unnamed and unknown to Maurer gas company employee that he had observed a van with "lots of Mexicans" in it driving on Route 28, slowing down when police cars were near and speeding up when they were gone. The gas company employee told Maurer he suspected the people in the van were illegal aliens.
2. Maurer encountered a van a short time later at a gas station. Maurer observed many of the van's occupants milling around. Maurer noticed that they were mostly African/American and/or Asian and not Mexican, as the gas company employee had described as being the occupants of a van. He spoke to the van's driver and, after being satisfied that the driver needed no assistance, Maurer drove away. A short time later, Maurer had second thoughts about the van and thought it might be the vehicle the gas company employee had observed.
3. Maurer went looking for the van and observed the van again as it was proceeding on the roadway. He testified that the van was traveling 35-45 miles per hour in a 55 mile per hour zone without activating its flashing lights. Maurer testified that he stopped the van because of its low speed without flashing lights, which he believed to be a violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, although he could not identify a section of the Code. Weeks later, when the hearing resumed, Maurer testified as to the sections of the Code he believed were violated.
4. After looking at the van driver's identification, Maurer looked inside the van and observed three (3) people in its front and nine (9) in the rear. This was the same number of people he had seen at the gas station. Some had identification and others did not. Defendant, one of the passengers, showed Maurer a resident alien card that was not authentic.
5. Maurer contacted ICE agents and Defendant later admitted that he was in this country illegally.
6. In evidence at the hearing on the Motion to Suppress (Docket No. 21) was Maurer's Incident Report. Inexplicably, Maurer's report says nothing about the encounter at the gas station or the alleged violation of the Motor Vehicle Code.
7. The van's driver testified similarly to Maurer about the gas station encounter. But, he also testified that he was driving 50-55 miles per hour, within the speed limit. He also testified that Maurer said nothing to him about the manner in which he was driving when Maurer stopped him.
8. Bolstered by the absence of any information in the police report, which would support Maurer's testimony at trial that the driver was driving at a low speed without flashing lights, I find that the testimony of the van driver is credible and Maurer's recollection is faulty.
1. The Government and the Defendant agree that this Motion rests on two arguments:
(a) whether Maurer had reasonable suspicion that the van was being driven in a way that violated ...