Alabama gets one wrong and one right

Alabama finds defendant was free to leave when he was standing back at the patrol car and a second officer arrived with a drug dog. State v. Hale, 990 So. 2d 450 (Ala. Crim. App. 2008).* Comment: Not one fact mentioned in the opinion supports the conclusion that the defendant would reasonably believe he was free to go. This is it: “As in Tillman, in this case, the appellee had signed the warning citation and Burch had returned his driver’s license to him at the time Burch requested his consent to search.” On handing the license back, the conversation immediately turned to there being drugs in the vehicle.

Officers pulled up behind a juvenile’s car for a traffic stop after he had gotten out of the car, and they ordered him back to the car, supposedly for officer safety, and then searched the car. There was no showing of probable cause or other justification to search the car under the stipulated facts. J.T.C. v. State, 990 So. 2d 444 (Ala. Crim. App. 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.