D.Colo.: Terry frisk of backpack unreasonable when def handcuffed and 15′ away

Defendant was handcuffed behind his back and was 15′ from his backpack. “Terry does not, however, automatically permit the search of a detainee’s bag, particularly where the bag is completely inaccessible to the detainee. Indeed, numerous courts have found bag searches unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment where the suspect was restrained and had no conceivable opportunity to access the bag.” Motion to suppress granted. United States v. Jones, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74914 (D. Colo. Apr. 24, 2024).

Claim of unnecessary prison strip searches fails. “Specifically, Plaintiff alleges the strip searches were frequent and that defendant Tabor’s stated basis for doing them was because he was entitled to due to Plaintiff’s status as a prisoner and in retaliation for Plaintiff’s filing of prison grievances. … While these reasons are seemingly not reasonable penological purposes, Plaintiff also indicates Tabor and Weishar were continually looking for contraband in Plaintiff’s cell and on his person, which as noted, is considered as a valid reason for such searches. More importantly, Plaintiff does not address the frequency of the searches, who and how many people were present for them, where they occurred (aside from the one incident in the C/O’s restroom, or what type of bodily search was performed, which is necessary for the Court to determine whether any of the searches or their combined effect was overly intrusive under the Fourth Amendment.” Lumbus v. Weisbar, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74643 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 24, 2024).*