BENTON – Drug agents seized $128,195 from Christopher Cook of California but they didn’t seize drugs, so he wants his cash back.
Cook moved to suppress it as evidence in a forfeiture action on April 13, after Senior U.S. District Judge Phil Gilbert denied a motion to dismiss the action.
His counsel Stephen Gray of Indianapolis claimed agents illegally detained him and searched his vehicle without a warrant.
Gray had filed defenses for Cook on April 9, denying that anyone furnished the money in exchange for a controlled substance.
Cook denies it was proceeds traceable to such an exchange and denied it was used to facilitate a violation of U.S. Code.
Agents Kevin Thebeau and Angelque Sarmento found Cook suspicious on a cold morning in February 2020, as he drove a Toyota Corolla west on Interstate 70.
According to Thebeau’s report, they observed the vehicle was extremely dirty and the driver’s side rear window was partially down.
They observed Utah registration, but when Sarmento ran the registration a return was not received.
They observed the Toyota following a Ford Explorer too close.
“Officers then observed the vehicle travel over the white fog line,” the report stated.
Thebeau wrote that they determined there was probable cause to stop him for following too close, improper lane use, and obstruction of windshield by a bracket.
Thebeau hit the lights and Cook stopped.
As agents approached he rolled his windows down.
He produced a California license.
Thebeau wrote that he asked Cook if he lived in California or Utah, and Cook said he was a student in Utah and his home was California.
“Cook advised he was coming home from Indiana because his grandmother had recently moved to Indiana and he moved some belongings to her new home, which she had left in California,” he wrote.
He wrote that Cook’s hands shook and his pupils constricted.
Cook was told to remain in his vehicle.
“While walking back to the patrol vehicle, declarant observed in plain view, two large duffle bags laying flat in the rear area of the vehicle,” Thebeau wrote, and that they appeared to be empty.
Sarmento advised that the vehicle returned to Lisa Cook.
Thebeau wrote that Christopher Cook’s address was near the emerald triangle, a region known for growing cannabis.
He contacted two agents for assistance and a dog, and asked Cook if he had anything illegal. Cook advised he didn’t.
“Cook advised he had ‘pot’ in the center console area,” Thebeau wrote.
If Cook had done it 39 days earlier, he would have broken Illinois law. Recreational marijuana use in the state became legal on Jan. 1, 2020.
Thebeau wrote that Cook admitted he had about $120,000.
He wrote that officers smelled the odor of cannabis when they opened the bags.
They found the cash in the rear and the pot in the console, and they handcuffed him and recited his rights.
Thebeau wrote that officer Kyle Waddington asked Cook if he wished to speak concerning the contents of his vehicle.
“Cook responded, ‘I can’t. They will kill me,’” Thebeau wrote.
Thebeau wrote that he asked Cook if it all belonged to him and he said it did.
He wrote that he asked for consent to search his phone and Cook refused.
Assistant U.S. attorney Adam Hanna filed for forfeiture last July.
Gray answered in August that, “Christopher Cook claims the entire amount and asserts legal title to the entire $128,915.”
“The claimant states that the currency is not subject to forfeiture and was lawfully possessed by claimant,” Gray wrote.
He moved to dismiss in September, claiming the government’s facts were insufficient to connect the money to illegal drug transactions.
He also claimed the government based its complaint on ambiguous facts constituting suspicion and conjecture at best. He claimed facts demonstrated that Cook was most likely a user.
“Would the court issue a probable cause search warrant of Cook’s residence based on these facts?” he wrote.
“The government cannot confiscate someone’s money because they smoke marijuana and have two empty duffle bags in their vehicle.”
The government served interrogatories and moved to compel responses.
Gilbert denied it, finding 16 violations of a rule limiting such interrogatories to Cook’s identity and relation to the cash.
“Where Cook works, whether he has a criminal history, whether he is the ‘rightful owner’ of the cash, where he held the cash before its seizure, why the cash was not in a bank, whether he paid taxes on the cash, whether there are others who know about the cash, why the cash was in his car, whether he ever had other cash seized from him, why he made certain statements during the traffic stop, who his grandmother is, where he went to school – all these questions aim to challenge the veracity of Cook’s claim of ownership,” Gilbert wrote.
Hanna opposed the motion to dismiss in January, claiming Cook cited no authority that the government must trace seized property to a specific transaction.
Gilbert denied the motion on March 26, finding “reasonable grounds for the belief of guilt supported by a substantial chance of criminal activity.”
Gilbert took into account the emerald triangle address, the shaky hands and constricted pupils, and the statement that they’d kill him.
Gray’s motion for suppression stated that reasonable suspicion requires specific and articulable facts.
“Objectively speaking, because one puts their windows down during a traffic stop, in the absence of an odor of marijuana or a masking agent, can the court rationally infer criminal activity afoot?” Gray wrote.
He asked the same question about residing in northern California and having duffle bags in back. He asked if it was likely Cook would return to the emerald triangle on I-70, or more likely traveling back to school in Utah.
He quoted Thebeau’s report that putting windows down and missing classes to help your grandmother was suspicious.
“If these facts allow an extended traffic stop, then a substantial portion of the driving public would be subject to prolonged detentions for the most paucity of facts suggesting criminal activity,” he wrote.