United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED July 25, 2023 No. 21-40849 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jacob Boone Wright,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:20-CR-1444-1 ______________________________ Before Smith, Barksdale, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Jerry E. Smith, Circuit Judge: This case returns to us after a limited remand. In the first submission, we clarified the point at which defendant Jacob Wright experienced a Fourth Amendment “seizure.” United States v. Wright (Wright I), 57 F.4th 524, 533 (5th Cir. 2023). But we remanded for further factfinding about the circum- stances precipitating the seizure. Now, based on the district court’s new findings, we conclude that the police had reasonable suspicion to seize Wright and thus lawfully obtained the incriminating evidence from his car. We affirm the judgment of conviction. Case: 21-40849 Document: 00516833261 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/25/2023

No. 21-40849

I. For the most part, the facts are as described in Wright I, id. at 527–29. We repeat only those details that are relevant to the reasonable-suspicion inquiry or were clarified on remand.

A. On July 15, 2020, the Corpus Christi Police Department received a “suspicious vehicle call.” The caller—who asked to remain anonymous— told dispatch that a gold Toyota Corolla was parked on Tanglewood Drive near Glen Arbor Park and that the occupants were dealing drugs. A core factual dispute is whether the tipster made the bare accusation that the individuals in the car were “dealers” or whether he claimed to see them dealing drugs. The dispatcher’s “call summary log” indicated that the tipster said that the occupants of the gold Corolla were “drug dealers,” that they were in “his park,” that the police needed to clear them out, and that he would shoot the suspects if necessary to defend himself. 1 Later, however, the police convinced the tipster to identify himself and testify at the suppression hearing. There, he gave slightly more detail—he claimed that he told police

_____________________ 1 Specifically, the log included the following information: • SUSPICIOUS PEOPLE AT LOC/RP ADV DRUG DEALERS/NO DRIVING CARS AT LOC • RP ADV NO DESC • RP ADV PD NEEDS TO GET THESE DRUG DEALERS OUT OF HIS PARK • DID THREATEN TO SHOOT SUBJS IF THEY DID SOMETHING THAT REQUIRED HIM TO DEFEND HIMSELF • REF TO GIVE INFO ON HIMSELF • ALSO ADV OF A GOLD COROLLA AT LOC/ IS ONE OF THE SUBJS CARS

2 Case: 21-40849 Document: 00516833261 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/25/2023

No. 21-40849

dispatch “that there was a gold Toyota