The stop was for speeding, 48/25. Defendant’s extreme nervousness and criminal history for drugs and weapons and an old alias justified his patdown for weapons. Defendant was previously asked for consent to search the car and declined. The extension of the stop to get a drug dog there was unreasonable because the factual basis for the extension, at best, could only be explained as having been learned after the conversation turned to drugs and calling for a drug dog. After the patdown, the video shows officer safety was no longer a concern because the officer got back into his car and let defendant stand alone outside. The nervousness, three cell phones, and the past drug conviction and weapons charge were insufficient to rise to reasonable suspicion for extending the stop. The motion to suppress is granted. State v. Chandler, 2015 Del. Super. LEXIS 190 (April 2, 2015).
The officer thought defendant had a gun because of the way his hands were in his pockets and he approached and asked defendant to remove his hands from his pockets. Defendant said “Fuck you,” and turned to walk away. The officer followed. Defendant wasn’t seized until the officer laid hands on his shoulder, and defendant turned with a gun in hand which got him Tased. He was a FIPF. United States v. Mays, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48688 (N.D.Ind. April 14, 2015).*
There was ample evidence of furtive movements in the car and strange comments from the defendant that a frisk was reasonable, so defense counsel couldn’t be ineffective for not raising it.
United States v. Maddox, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48221 (W.D.Ark. March 5, 2015).*