Defendant was seen in a park wearing a gang color shirt and was a suspected truant, although the officer didn’t act on it. Hours later, after school, defendant was seen again with a group wearing red except his red shirt was off and over his shoulder. There was no reasonable suspicion for the stop at the time it happened. Jacobs v. State, 2017 Ind. LEXIS 501 (June 29, 2017):
… Jacobs’ display of a red garment (which he was never wearing, and did not have at the time police approached), while standing among those clad in red, was thus insufficient to justify an investigatory stop under the Fourth Amendment.
We concur with the Court of Appeals’ observation that Jacobs’ actions, taken as a whole, were “indeed suspicious.” Jacobs, 62 N.E.3d at 1261. This is bolstered by the fact that Jacobs was actually carrying an unlicensed handgun. Nevertheless, at the time police moved to detain Jacobs, police did not have a reasonable suspicion that he had engaged in or was about to engage in any criminal conduct: “[M]erely looking suspicious is not sufficient to overcome Fourth Amendment protections[.]” Stalling, 713 N.E.2d at 925 (internal quotation omitted). Accordingly, we find this stop violated Jacobs’ Fourth Amendment rights.