Reasonable suspicion sometimes is just a Rorschach test:

Defendant “argues LPD acted on that hunch when deciding the white Ford Explorer was involved in the February bank robbery, and there was no proof beyond a speculative hunch that the February suspect and the April suspect were the same person.” The court disagrees because the totality of facts is more than a hunch and it adds up to reasonable suspicion. United States v. McCain, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186430 (D. Neb. Sept. 18, 2017),* adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181025 (D. Neb. Nov. 1, 2017).*

Illogical account of missing exit to girlfriend’s house three exits back, possession of $372, mutually contradictory statements about girlfriend, lying about just moving there, and not looking the officer in the eye when talking about girlfriend was reasonable suspicion and, with a criminal history check, all lawful actions reasonably extending the stop under Rodriguez. State v. Bullock, 2017 N.C. LEXIS 896 (Nov. 3, 2017),* rev’g 785 S.E.2d 746 (N.C. App. 2016).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.