MA: Driver’s and passenger’s conduct during traffic stop helped create RS for frisk of passenger in backseat

During a traffic stop, the driver and front seat passenger were argumentative and threatening for a fight. The officers surmised that this was a distraction from the vehicle because it could have a firearm in it. On the totality, there was reasonable suspicion. “Factors that the motion judge considered included Paris’s ‘uncharacteristic’ behavior during the traffic stop, which officers interpreted as an effort to draw their attention away from the vehicle and its contents, the prior involvement with firearms of the three male passengers in the car, their known gang affiliations, and the high crime area in which the traffic stop occurred. Although each of these factors standing alone would be insufficient to justify the patfrisk of the defendant, the totality of these factors justified not only the exit order, but also the patfrisk.” The frisk of the defendant who was in the backseat was reasonable. Commonwealth v. Sweeting-Bailey, 2021 Mass. LEXIS 690 (Dec. 22, 2021).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not arguing waiver of a claim when the state supreme court wanted briefing on the merits. “For the petitioner to suggest that his search warrant would have been analyzed under the former Jacumin standard if only trial counsel had argued waiver strains credulity. The petitioner is not entitled to relief on this issue.” Tuttle v. State, 2021 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 578 (Dec. 21, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Stop and frisk. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.