CA5: Frisking rousted man who denied having gun was without reasonable suspicion

A convoy of police arrive in an apartment complex because it’s a high crime area, and one walks up to defendant’s car and talks to him asking “where’s your gun?” He says he doesn’t have one. Then the officer asks for his DL, and he says he doesn’t have one. The officer opens the door and rousts him out of the car and frisks him unreasonably because there is no reasonable suspicion. United States v. Hill, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 9960 (5th Cir. May 29, 2014):

For the reasons hereinafter assigned, we conclude that the totality of the relevant circumstances, including the girlfriend’s brisk departure from Hill’s car and the circumstances that transpired during the seconds between her exit and the officer’s seizure of Hill, did not amount to articulable facts from which an officer could reasonably suspect that Hill was engaged in criminal activity. Thus, the seizure violated the Fourth Amendment under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), and the firearm and ammunition obtained from the seizure must be suppressed. Because Hill’s conviction was obtained with evidence that should have been suppressed, we vacate the conviction and sentence.