{"id":4147,"date":"2010-10-01T18:10:44","date_gmt":"2010-05-08T11:36:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-05-08T11:36:00","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4147","title":{"rendered":"TX14: Patdown of &#8220;&#8216;more than average&#8217; size&#8221; bust was unreasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Patdown of female breasts was unreasonable. Overly intensive search was suppressed. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.14thcoa.courts.state.tx.us\/opinions\/HTMLopinion.asp?OpinionID=86876\">State v. Williams<\/a>, 312 S.W.3d 276 (Tex. App.\u2014Houston (14th Dist.) 2010):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Here, the trial court concluded that Officer Duncan would have been justified in conducting a pat-down of Williams. The distinction between Sheppard  and Carmouche and the case at bar is that Officer Duncan did not conduct a Terry pat-down before employing more intrusive means of searching Williams. If a pat-down had been conducted, and if a weapon or other contraband had been detected as a result, then either Officer Duncan or the female officer could have attempted to extract the item or could have conducted a more intrusive search.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, although Officer Duncan had been told that Williams had a knife, he was not told, nor was there any other indication, that Williams had hidden the knife in her bra. Furthermore, there is nothing to show that a pat-down would have been dangerous or ineffective. Officer Duncan stated that he did not want to pat-down a female, but the State has not cited any authority to show that he was therefore justified in conducting a more intrusive search. And the &#8220;more than average&#8221; size of Williams&#8217;s bust, as Officer Duncan described it, did not constitute a reasonable circumstance that would allow officers to conduct an overly broad search. See Balentine, 71 S.W.3d at 770. Because the State has not presented us with a situation justifying a search exceeding the scope of a pat-down, we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in suppressing the evidence.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4147\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4147","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4147"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4147\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}