CA10: Def could not be charged with obstruction for refusing patdown that lacked RS

“The officer arrested Romero for obstruction because he failed to immediately comply with the officer’s request that he submit to a pat-down search. Romero argued in his motion that the firearm must be suppressed because the officer had neither (1) reasonable suspicion to conduct the pat-down search nor (2) probable cause to arrest Romero for obstruction. The district court denied Romero’s motion. We reverse, because we agree with Romero’s latter argument that there was insufficient probable cause to support an arrest under [N.M.’s] section 30-22-1(D). Thus, the search of the backpack cannot be supported as a search incident to arrest. Because of this ruling, we do not address Romero’s first argument that there was no reasonable suspicion to support the initial pat-down search. We remand this case to the district court for further proceedings.” United States v. Romero, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26779 (10th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019).

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

Comments are closed.