FL: Officer could see gun in pocket, and that was RS for frisk

The officer knew that defendant was armed because, on patrol, he could see the gun in defendant’s pocket. He stopped the car and approached without his own gun drawn because he could see defendant’s hands and didn’t feel threatened. In talking to defendant, defendant finally lied about being armed, and then the situation escalated into the frisk, and it was valid. Mackey v. State, 124 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 2013).

There was probable cause from defendant’s actions and denials of what the officers already knew. United States v. Cavazos, 542 Fed. Appx. 263 (4th Cir. 2013).*

Defendant filed his brief alleging the search was invalid, and the government responded claiming consent to the search. For the first time, then, he challenged the search as without consent in the reply brief. Getting to the merits anyway, the search was by consent. Once the officer discovered cocaine, the automobile exception applied. United States v. Correa, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149366 (N.D. Ill. October 17, 2013).*