{"id":4243,"date":"2011-07-10T09:01:01","date_gmt":"2010-06-01T07:06:06","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-06-01T07:06:06","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4243","title":{"rendered":"MA: Pushing officer’s hands away to avoid a frisk was not independent assault; it was a fruit of the unjustified stop"},"content":{"rendered":"

Defendant\u2019s stop and frisk was unjustified by any articulable suspicion. When the officer started the frisk the defendant pushed his hands away saying \u201cDon\u2019t touch me.\u201d The act of pushing the officer\u2019s hands away was not a new crime of assault rending the exclusionary rule inapplicable. \u201cThus, whatever acts may have intervened, they did not influence the decision to seize the defendant, and accordingly the acts cannot have dissipated the taint of the original unlawful seizure. By the same reasoning, the renewed patfrisk was not an arrest for assault and battery on a police officer.\u201d Commonwealth v. Martin<\/a>, 457 Mass. 14, 927 N.E.2d 432 (2010), revg 73 Mass. App. Ct. 526, 529, 899 N.E.2d 869 (2009).<\/p>\n

Defendant used a false ID and credit card to rent a hotel room. When she was ordered out of the room, she left behind bags that she denied were hers. This was an abandonment. State v. Brown<\/a>, 348 Ore. 293, 232 P.3d 962 (2010), rev\u2019g 228 Ore. App. 197, 206 P.3d 1180 (2009).* [The court concedes standing in the room based on the state constitution.]<\/p>\n

When defendant\u2019s car was stopped, the passenger admitted to having a gun with a carry permit. The officer looked under the passenger seat for the gun and then looked in a coat in the back seat in case there was another. That search was justified for officer safety under Chimel based on the officer\u2019s reasonable belief that where there is one gun another might be found. State v. Williamson<\/a>, 2010 Ohio 2331, 2010 Ohio App. LEXIS 1919 (5th Dist. May 24, 2010).*<\/p>\n

Specific information from a known CI that defendant was selling drugs from a particular location supported defendant\u2019s stop which resulted in a plain view of drugs on the seat. The stop and plain view was valid. A known informant was entitled to more credibility than an anonymous informant. Commonwealth v. Brown<\/a>, 606 Pa. 198, 996 A.2d 473 (2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/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-4243","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4243","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=4243"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4243\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4243"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4243"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4243"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}