Page 49 - March April 2020 TPA

a brown paper bag from Darrell and handed it to “reserving the right to appeal the ruling on the
Deputy Latch. Inside was a bottle of whiskey— motion to suppress evidence.” On January 7, 2019,
contraband in dry Alcorn County. Darrell was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment
Officer Billingsley then asked Deputy Latch to and a three-year term of supervised release. This
watch Darrell while Billingsley approached the appeal followed.
door and attempted to apprehend Ms. Smith. When evaluating a ruling on a motion to suppress,
Deputy Latch asked Darrell what his name was, but we “review[] questions of law de novo and findings
Darrell declined to answer. Deputy Latch then of fact for clear error.” All evidence is viewed “in
noticed two knives hooked onto Darrell’s belt. the light most favorable to the party that prevailed”
Latch confiscated the knives and asked Darrell if below—in this case, the Government.
he had any other weapons. Although Darrell said “Warrantless searches and seizures are ‘per se
no, Deputy Latch patted him down to be sure. As he unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment—
did so, he felt an item in Darrell’s front pocket. He subject only to a few specifically established and
asked what it was, but Darrell did not answer. Latch well-delineated exceptions.’” The Supreme Court
later testified that “when [he] edged the pocket carved out one such exception in Terry v. Ohio.
open,” he “could see the butt end of [a] pistol.” Under Terry, if a law enforcement officer can point
Latch then “pushed [Darrell] against the car and to specific, articulable facts that lead him to
removed the weapon,” which turned out to be a reasonably suspect “that criminal activity may be
loaded semiautomatic pistol with its serial number afoot,” he may briefly detain an individual to
obliterated. Darrell’s pocket also contained a investigate. In addition, if the officer reasonably
substance believed to be methamphetamine. believes that the individual is “armed and presently
Deputy Latch handcuffed Darrell and placed him dangerous to the officer[] or to others, [he] may
in a squad car. conduct a limited protective search for concealed
Latch estimated that the officers’ entire encounter weapons”—often called a “frisk.”
with Darrell lasted less than a minute. Only after Generally, the legality of such stops “is tested in
Darrell had been handcuffed did the officers notice two parts”: “Courts first examine whether the
a man sitting in the passenger seat of the Camaro. officer’s action was justified at its inception, and
He had not attempted to exit the vehicle or then inquire whether the officer’s subsequent
participated in any way in the confrontation. The actions were reasonably related in scope to the
officers asked the passenger to step outside, circumstances that justified the stop.”
identified him as Donald Dunn, and arrested him As Darrell challenges only “the justification of
on an outstanding warrant from the City of the initial seizure,” not the scope of the ensuing
Farmington. Both men were transported to the search, we must answer only whether, under the
Alcorn County Jail and held for investigation. A totality of the circumstances, the officers had
few days later, the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics reasonable suspicion to stop Darrell as he
confirmed that Darrell was a convicted felon. approached Ms. Smith’s house.
In January 2018, Darrell was indicted for being a The precise contours of the reasonable-suspicion
felon in possession of a firearm. He filed a motion standard remain “somewhat abstract.” Certainly,
to suppress, arguing that “law enforcement did not reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard
possess adequate reasonable suspicion to stop and than probable cause or preponderance of the
subsequently search him.” The district court denied evidence, but the Supreme Court has “deliberately
Darrell’s motion following a hearing at which avoided reducing it to ‘a neat set of legal rules.’”
Deputy Latch was the sole witness called to testify, Instead, it has “described reasonable suspicion
and Darrell entered a conditional guilty plea simply as ‘a particularized and objective basis’ for
suspecting the person stopped of criminal activity.”

42 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 Texas Police Journal