W.D.Pa.: Stop of regular known to carry guns and drug was reasonable

Officers pulled over defendant who was, to them, a regular, and that knowledge formed the basis of reasonable suspicion once stopped. In plain view were baggies for storing crack. (Sort of: His history with drugs and weapons was such that his merely being on the street is RS he is carrying something. [Technically not a good argument under Terry, officer.]) During the stop, defendant was excessively nervous. [If he’s a regular, why would be he nervous unless he was carrying?] The patdown was reasonable and not excessive. United States v. Johnson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7001 (W.D. Pa. January 27, 2010)*:

Sealock recognized defendant as the driver, having become familiar with him from numerous past incidents defendant had had with the police in Aliquippa, including several involving firearms. Incident Reports from these previous encounters were admitted as Government Exhibits 1, 3, 4 & 5. Because of this familiarity, Sealock had concerns about his safety and as to whether defendant may have been armed.

Sealock testified that defendant appeared extremely nervous and that he was sweating and stuttering. Defendant was unable to produce a valid driver’s license, only a picture identification card. Sealock observed an open box of sandwich baggies on the floor of the passenger side of the vehicle, which in light of his training and experience he knew to be used sometimes in the packaging of narcotics.

Defendant had been stopped with 400 lbs of marijuana and he agreed to help set up the guy he was taking it to. His text messages were partially innocent in tone, but they were corroborative of the CI and PC. United States v. Laidlaw, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6439 (D. Conn. January 27, 2010).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.