United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 19-3500 & 20-1111 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LOLA CHANG and EY LAO, Defendants-Appellants. ____________________

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. No. 1:19-cr-00058-WCG — William C. Griesbach, Judge. ____________________

ARGUED OCTOBER 30, 2020 — DECIDED JUNE 4, 2021 ____________________

Before MANION, ROVNER, and SCUDDER, Circuit Judges. ROVNER, Circuit Judge. After sliding off the road on a snowy night, Lola Chang and Ey Lao were arrested after a police officer, originally approaching the car to check on their safety, grew suspicious and a search eventually turned up ev- idence of drugs and weapons. Chang and Lao both contend that the search violated their Fourth Amendment rights. Lao also challenged the district court’s ruling prohibiting the in- troduction of Chang’s later hearsay statement claiming 2 Nos. 19-3500 & 20-1111 possession of and responsibility for all of the illegal items in the car. Although the defendants are correct that the officer’s hunch alone was not sufficient justification for the seizure, other factors provided the reasonable suspicion necessary. Moreover, we have found no abuse of the district court’s dis- cretion in barring the hearsay evidence. I. As is often the case in Wisconsin, March came in like a lion on March 1, 2019, and the snow made road conditions so treacherous that the Brown County Sheriff’s Department had to call its supervisors out to respond to reports of accidents and cars stuck in ditches. At around 11:30 p.m., Lieutenant Jason McAuly responded to such a report and found a black BMW sedan far off the roadway in the gore—the area be- tween the exit ramp and the road. The car was turned perpen- dicular to the road. McAuly pulled up in front of the car, acti- vated his emergency lights, and walked to the driver’s side window. As he approached, Lao lowered the car window and told the officer that he had summoned a tow truck and that it was on its way. He reiterated this information several times. According to McAuly, Lao displayed mannerisms that the of- ficer associated with nervousness—rapid speaking, shaky hands, quivering voice, and acting as though he was dismiss- ing the officer and wanting him to leave. He was also speak- ing loudly and sharply to his passenger, co-defendant Chang. McAuly testified that these behaviors immediately aroused his suspicions and were counter to his experience over his twenty-four-year career that people who find themselves in trouble are ordinarily relieved when a police officer arrives. Shortly after McAuly arrived, Chang got out of the car and opened the trunk to retrieve a special eye bolt used for towing Nos. 19-3500 & 20-1111 3 the car. McAuly testified that he intended to stay with the pair and the car until help arrived to make sure they were safe and also to investigate whether the accident might have been the result of a traffic law violation. McAuly asked both Chang and Lao for identification and asked that they remain in the vehicle. As he returned to his car to run their names through the database, Lao got out of the car. McAuly exited his squad car and told Lao to return to the vehicle. Lao seemed reluctant to do so, but McAuly re- mained standing outside his squad car until he complied. McAuly’s check of Lao and Chang’s driver’s licenses re- vealed that both had extensive recent felony criminal histories and that both were under extended state supervised release for methamphetamine drug co