IN: Knowledge owner has a suspended license does not justify stop of his car without knowing owner is driver

Knowledge that the owner of a vehicle had a suspended license does not justify a stop of the vehicle. Holly v. State, 2008 Ind. App. LEXIS 1258 (June 17, 2008):

We agree with Wilkinson that a police officer’s knowledge that the registered owner of a vehicle lacks a valid license, by itself, is insufficient to provide the officer with reasonable suspicion sufficient to permit an investigatory stop. The central inquiry in determining whether an investigatory stop is permissible is whether the officer has a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. Terry, 392 U.S. at 30. Although an officer needs only “a minimum level of objective justification for making a stop,” the justification must be “more than an inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or hunch.” Beverly, 801 N.E.2d at 1261. A police officer’s knowledge that an owner of a vehicle may not lawfully drive creates reasonable suspicion of criminal activity only where the officer has reason to believe that the owner is actually driving the vehicle. In a case such as this where the officer has observed absolutely nothing that would indicate that the driver of the vehicle is the owner and the officer has no reason to believe that the vehicle is stolen or that a law is otherwise being broken, the officer lacks objective justification for conducting an investigatory stop. (emphasis in original)

Plaintiff sufficiently alleged state action for a private search instigated by police used to revoke his probation under a PLRA dismissal. The case is remanded without the defendants ever having participated in the case. Radunz v. Haden, 286 Fed. Appx. 314 (7th Cir. 2008) (per curiam).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.