|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (Iowa)
#7967668 - 02/02/08 05:29 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What kinda bullshit is this? How could this be justified? A terry stop is to determine if a suspected no-count is harboring weapons able to do immediate harm to the officer (or the public in some cases). Check my sticky thread in this forum for brief info.
So what is the goal of a shoe search? Clearly to find money or drugs. If a knife was in there, it surely wasn't an immediate threat to the officer:
Quote:
Under the totality of the circumstances we find Sergeant Skaff’s further search inside Morton’s shoes exceeded the permissible scope of a protective search for weapons. Sergeant Skaff did not notice any suspicious movements or activity by Givens or Morton. Sergeant Skaff was not alone when he approached the car. There were three other officers present during the stop. He testified that Morton and Givens were both very compliant and cooperative throughout the traffic stop. Skaff did testify that he has encountered persons who hide knives in their shoes but did not explain why he suspected Morton might have a weapon inside his shoes. Although we are keenly aware of the need for officers to conduct protective searches, under the facts of this case, we cannot identify any circumstances that would raise a reasonable suspicion that Morton was carrying a weapon inside his shoes. Sergeant Skaff exceeded the permissible scope of a protective weapons search when he continued beyond a patdown of the outer clothing without any circumstances indicating Morton was concealing a weapon.
http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20080130/7-955.pdf
The sad thing is that this case cites other cases where shoe searching was held to be reasonable as a search for knives. What bullshit...
Oh, and the trial court allowed it!
|
shroomtrip
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/08
Posts: 2
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: johnm214]
#8008275 - 02/11/08 11:02 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
This was not justified. The district court erred in overruling the motion to suppress evidence. His conviction was reversed. 
Quote:
We cannot conclude that Morton’s kicking off his shoes upon Sergeant Skaff’s request was implied consent to conduct the search. Although Sergeant Skaff was friendly and polite during the encounter, asking “Can you kick your shoes off?,” his politeness does not transform the situation into a voluntary exchange. Sergeant Skaff’s requests cannot be isolated from his mandate moments earlier that “I gotta pat you down real quick buddy.” To the average person, the request to remove one’s shoes would be part of the patdown rather than a separate request for consent to expand the search for weapons. Under these circumstances, we find Morton did not give consent to the search by kicking off his shoes after the Sergeant’s request. V. CONCLUSION. The district court erred in overruling Morton’s motion to suppress evidence. Sergeant Skaff exceeded the scope of a protective weapons search by requesting Morton remove his shoes without a reasonable belief that Morton was concealing a weapon in them. Since the request was made under the assertion of authority to conduct a patdown, Morton’s compliance with the request was not voluntary consent to the search. We reverse Morton’s conviction and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion. REVERSED AND REMANDED."
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: shroomtrip]
#8008588 - 02/11/08 12:13 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
> His conviction was reversed. 
How many hours did he spend detained of his freedom? How much money did it cost him to regain his freedom after a sworn officer violated the suspect's civil rights? What happened to the cop to deter this sort of violation in the future?
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: Seuss]
#8008646 - 02/11/08 12:31 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: > His conviction was reversed. 
How many hours did he spend detained of his freedom? How much money did it cost him to regain his freedom after a sworn officer violated the suspect's civil rights? What happened to the cop to deter this sort of violation in the future?
yep yep
prolly lost no money out of pocket, just earning potential, perhaps signifigant depending on his employment prior to the arrest
and yeah, the cop won't get shit.. Since their are cases where courts have upheld terry stops w/ shoe searches, you can't really say his actions were clearly unreasonable to any reasonable officer's mind, which is generally the hurdle to cross to sustain a sec. 1983 civil rights claim over a sovereign immunity defense.
So this guy will get nothing, the officer will have no reprocusions, and even if the guy did beat teh sovereign immunity challenge, he might be screwed by the unclean hands doctrine- since he was in the wrong, legally.
|
shroomtrip
Stranger
Registered: 01/20/08
Posts: 2
Last seen: 9 years, 3 months
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: Seuss]
#8008971 - 02/11/08 02:14 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: > His conviction was reversed. 
How many hours did he spend detained of his freedom? How much money did it cost him to regain his freedom after a sworn officer violated the suspect's civil rights? What happened to the cop to deter this sort of violation in the future?
Unfortunately, I'm sure this guy easily lost thousands of dollars and spent countless hours dealing with this incident. It is complete BS! In the end, at least he won and the judge decided that this was not acceptable by the officer and reversed the conviction. This is good for future incidents where officers may ask suspects to remove their shoes where no reasonable suspicion is present.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: shroomtrip]
#8012016 - 02/12/08 04:35 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What happens in the following:
Cop: Can I search your real quick to ensure that you don't have any weapnons Me: No. I don't have any weapons. Unless I am being detained, I would like to leave now. If I am being detained, then please handcuff me, rather than searching me, if that helps you feel safer.
I know... cops don't have to ask before a Terry 'stop' (search), but they usually do anyway (in my experience). I would rather the cop escalate the encounter to a detainment than to have the cop violate my 4th amendment rights. Besides, in the case where a cop is searching, I am already being detained and would honestly rather be "hooked" than searched.
I also know this would set off alarms for the cop and would end up in a larger waste of my time. But it also makes a statement, and to me that is important.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,276
Last seen: 1 hour, 42 minutes
|
Re: Terry stop unreasonable when officer searches suspect's shoes absent particularized suspicoun (I [Re: Seuss]
#8013351 - 02/12/08 01:34 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
> I would rather the cop escalate the encounter to a detainment than to have the cop violate my 4th amendment rights.
Also, once they detain you, they owe you some paperwork.
A friend of mine used to act extra suspicious whenever he saw a cop so he would get detained, then he would demand the paperwork, and they would have to fill out a long form entitled "field contact report".
He now has quite a collection of field contact reports and all the cops in the city know him very well, they all talk about him at the station. After word got around the cops stopped falling for it, they would mumble something about libertarians and drive off.
|
|