{"id":4545,"date":"2011-01-11T12:24:45","date_gmt":"2010-08-15T00:17:37","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-08-14T19:47:37","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4545","title":{"rendered":"CA6: &#8220;Frisk&#8221; of a suspected bank robber&#8217;s duffle bag for the gun they reasonably believed he had was reasonable"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Frisking defendant\u2019s duffle bag that was partly unzipped for a weapon that the officers reasonably believed was in there was reasonable. He was wanted for bank robbery, and there was reason to believe he was armed. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca6.uscourts.gov\/opinions.pdf\/10a0244p-06.pdf\">United States v. Walker<\/a>, 615 F.3d 728, 2010 FED App. 0244P (6th Cir. 2010):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The directive to steer clear of \u201cunreasonable\u201d searches cannot be reduced to a \u201cfrisk first\u201d or any other one-size-fits-all command, which is presumably why courts of appeals have declined to adopt a \u201cfrisk first\u201d requirement for Terry searches. See, e.g., <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=9770856753144949169&amp;q=315+F.3d+959&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">United States v. Shranklen<\/a>, 315 F.3d 959, 963-64 (8th Cir. 2003); <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=11575227654472242940&amp;q=354+F.3d+1197&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">United States v. Thomson<\/a>, 354 F.3d 1197, 1200-01 (10th Cir. 2003); <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=4280665415118073805&amp;q=289+F.3d+690&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">United States v. Rhind<\/a>, 289 F.3d 690, 693-94 (11th Cir. 2002); <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=8436020867955786784&amp;q=133+F.3d+993&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">United States v. Brown<\/a>, 133 F.3d 993, 998-99 (7th Cir. 1998). Other courts likewise have recognized that non-frisk search methods may be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. See, e.g., <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=4250725606096108619&amp;q=903+F.2d+334&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">United States v. Landry<\/a>, 903 F.2d 334, 337 (5th Cir. 1990) (grabbing a bag and looking inside); <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=4330243911031191955&amp;q=79+N.Y.2d+907&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">People v. Jackson<\/a>, 79 N.Y.2d 907, 590 N.E.2d 240, 241, 581 N.Y.S.2d 655 (N.Y. 1992)  (shining a flashlight through a plastic bag). The courts\u2019 job is to ask what was reasonable under the circumstances, not to poke and prod for lesser-included options that might not occur to even the most reasonable and seasoned officer in the immediacy of a dangerous encounter.<\/p>\n<p>If it is a loaded gun that concerns the officer, moreover, it is by no means clear that poking and prodding the outside of a duffel bag is the most sensible way to find it. No doubt, the frisking of the outside of a bag intrudes less on the privacy of the suspect. But at what cost? Who looks for a gun by aimlessly grabbing and manipulating the outside of a large bag that may or may not contain the gun&#8211;and a loaded gun at that? That, we suspect, is not what gun-safety programs recommend. If Terry permits officers to open a closed container located in a car after a stop and after the officers have removed the passengers from the car, see <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.ca\/scholar_case?case=4292797909531857390&amp;q=Michigan+v.+long&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002\">Long<\/a>, 463 U.S. at 1050-51, it surely permits an officer to unzip a duffel bag, one that is already partially unzipped, to see what is lying on top of it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4545\">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-4545","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4545","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=4545"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4545\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4545"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4545"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4545"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}