Ability to stop and order defendant into police car did not translate into power to frisk

Defendant could be stopped for tinted window offense, and he could be ordered out of the car for officer safety, but that does not translate into an ability to frisk without reasonable suspicion. Frisk suppressed. State v. Vineyard, 2008 Ohio 204, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 165 (2d Dist. January 11, 2008).*

Uncorroborated anonymous tip failed to provide reasonable suspicion for a patdown. State v. Jordan, 2008 Ohio 199, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 174 (2d Dist. January 11, 2008):

[*P11] For an anonymous tip to provide the suspicion required to perform a pat down search, the information obtained must be independently corroborated by the police officer to demonstrate that the defendant was engaged in criminal activity. State v. Works, Montgomery App. No. 19557, 2003 Ohio 4720, at P19, citing Alabama v. White (1990), 496 U.S. 325, 110 S.Ct. 2412. Here, an anonymous caller notified the police that a black male wearing a white t-shirt and blue jeans had been hanging around Breitenstrater Square. Upon his arrival, Leal encountered Jordan some distance away from the businesses, and did not observe the suspect engaging in any criminal activity. Therefore, the anonymous call merely gave the officer a reason to investigate, but did not provide the suspicion necessary to conduct a pat down search.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.