Stop of a man in a hoodie for carrying a weapon lacked reasonable suspicion

[TMMT]

Stop of a man in a hoodie for carrying a weapon lacked reasonable suspicion

FourthAmendment.com - Post details: CA8: Stop of a man in a hoodie for carrying a weapon lacked reasonable suspicion

The officer suspected that defendant was carrying a gun in the pocket of his hoodie, but it was based on his experience as an officer and no other facts about the hands or what he might be holding. The Eighth Circuit [surprise!] finds this not enough for reasonable suspicion under Terry and Arvizu. United States v. Jones, 09-1731 (8th Cir. June 8, 2010):

Like the district court, we conclude that Officer Hasiak lacked the requisite reasonable suspicion that Jones was carrying a concealed firearm in his hoodie pocket, as opposed to some other object, or no object at all. The critical question is, again, whether Hasiak had a “particularized and objective basis” for his suspicion. Arvizu, 534 U.S. at 273. Given the deference we must accord both Hasiak’s training and experience and the inferences drawn by a resident district judge, this is a close question.

The government emphasizes that Jones by clutching the outside of his goodie pocket exhibited one of the firearm-carrying clues Hasiak had been trained to observe, and Hasiak’s testimony that, on ten other occasions, the suspect he stopped and frisked was in fact armed. But this evidence was not as conclusive as the government suggests. On cross examination, Hasiak admitted that he was unable to see the size or shape of whatever was in Jones’s hoodie pocket, and that Jones exhibited none of the other clues Hasiak had been trained to look for, such as walking with an unusual gait, turning that part of his body away from the officers’ view, adjusting his grip or the location of the item in his pocket, or running away. Compare United States v. Jackson, 175 F.3d 600, 601-02 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 828 (1999). Government counsel then failed to clarify whether the other ten suspects to whom Hasiak generally referred had likewise exhibited only this one telltale clue. Because totality of the circumstances is the test, undue focus on one circumstance is suspect.

[TMMT]

How this case even made it to the 8th Circuit defies all logic...

The officer suspected that defendant was carrying a gun in the pocket of his hoodie, but it was based on his experience as an officer and no other facts

the whole thing was based upon nothing more than a hunch or a mere suspicion, based not upon fact but upon experience.

WTF!??!

Is there a new exemption to the search warrant rule?

The "gut feeling exemption"?

[TNFF319]

How this case even made it to the 8th Circuit defies all logic...

the whole thing was based upon nothing more than a hunch or a mere suspicion, based not upon fact but upon experience.

WTF!??!

Is there a new exemption to the search warrant rule?

The "gut feeling exemption"?

Duh, it is the police. They can do what they want.

[Guest pjblurton]

Duh, it is the police. They can do what they want.

[Smith]

Did anyone care to notice that this particular fellow had been armed on TEN previous occasions? Why the heck was he not in jail for firearms charges to begin with?

I agree with the above post had this one detail not been present.

After reading it again ... was the same guy stopped 10 times or ten separate suspects?

[Guest Straight Shooter]

uh-oh.

[bubbiesdad]

Duh, it is the police. They can do what they want.

Here it comes. Over under anyone?

Edited June 9, 2010 by bubbiesdad

[Guest pjblurton]

Over under anyone?

OK, gimme a 2 way parlay on 6 and 8 hardways and a horn high midnight...

[TGO David]

TMMT will not be rejoining us.

TNFF319 may rejoin us in 7-days, proving him some time to reflect.

Anyone else? I'll keep the thread open a bit longer in case more people want to test me tonight.

PS: Anyone know what cops and firefighters have in common? They both wanted to grow up and be cops when they were kids.

[mcurrier]

Did anyone care to notice that this particular fellow had been armed on TEN previous occasions? Why the heck was he not in jail for firearms charges to begin with?

Because only first time accidental offenders who are normally good citizens do hard time. Real criminals get the revolving door treatment.

[TGO David]

What... no one else? Come on... thread's just ripe for it. Go ahead and see if I meant it when I said I was sick and tired of the LEO bashing.

Step right up!

[TGO David]

Guess not.

/thread