D.Kan.: RS was shown for a frisk even though the officer didn’t articulate it

A frisk was reasonable where the officer would have to turn his back on the defendant to deal with the passenger, even though the officer did not articulate specific reasonable suspicion he was armed. “As in Manjarrez, the deputy could not reasonably be expected to leave Fager in his patrol car, turn his back on Fager, insert his head into Fager’s car, and search the car or arrest the passenger without first checking Fager for weapons. Because of the presence of the passenger, the presence of more than one officer does not make the situation any less dangerous than the situation in Manjarrez. As in Manjarrez, the record shows that the deputy was concerned for his safety and wanted to conduct the search of Fager’s car without fear of violence.” United States v. Fager, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156980 (D. Kan. November 6, 2014).

Defendant’s motion to reopen suppression hearing is denied because it wouldn’t matter, and there was a choice not to seek to introduce it until he lost. “Defendant argues that the hearing should be reopened so that I can consider evidence that ‘became relevant’ only after I issued my prior ruling, and that he had not located until after the hearing. I find that the evidence Defendant identifies relates directly to issues that were fully addressed at the hearing and was available to Defendant at the time, and that the mere fact that he did not then choose to locate or introduce it is not a sufficient basis to reopen the hearing now. Moreover, even were the hearing reopened, the evidence identified in Defendant’s motion would not alter my original ruling. Accordingly, I deny the motion.” United States v. Harris, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157119 (D. Md. November 6, 2014).*