The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s order suppressing the evidence. At 1 a.m., the defendant parked his car in the parking lot of a gym that was closed and ate the food he purchased at a nearby WaWa. The gym’s parking lot was known for high-drug activity, and the owner of the gym had called the police about vehicles parking in the lot. However, the owner made no report of crime on the date in question, and he never described the defendant or his vehicle to the police. While on patrol, the headlights of a state police cruiser illuminated the inside of the defendant’s car, and he looked in the troopers’ direction. After a short pause, the defendant started to back out of the parking sport and turned his car as if to leave the area. The trooper honked his horn. The defendant stopped his car, and “the troopers alighted from their cruiser. They walked to the other vehicle and smelled cannabis wafting from an open window. After having the defendant exit his car, they searched it and found a cannabis cigarette.” The defendant made inculpating statements and failed field sobriety tests. The police arrested him, and a blood-draw revealed THC in his system. The Commonwealth charged driving under the influence of cannabis and related offenses. The defendant moved to suppress the seized evidence and petitioned for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. The trial court granted the motion, the Commonwealth appealed, and the Superior Court affirmed. The Court ruled that the troopers did not have reasonable suspicion when they honked their horn, thereby initiating an investigative detention. The Court opined that the “vague reports of random criminal conduct did not describe the people supposedly using or selling drugs or anything to identify their vehicles. Thus, the gym owner’s reports extend to any car in the parking lot, including the state police’s patrol car.”