CA2 en banc: Directions to a suspect don’t make a stop a search without a trespass or an intrusion into a REP

CA2 en banc, summary by the court (8-3): “This case presents what is, in some respects, a familiar question: whether a police officer’s pat-down search of a suspect for weapons was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Based on the facts presented, we conclude that it was. We write en banc to confirm several fundamental, and well-settled, principles of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. First, a police officer’s verbal directives to a suspect do not transform a stop into a search when they do not amount to a physical trespass or intrusion into an area subject to a reasonable expectation of privacy, irrespective of any reasonable belief by a suspect as to whether a search is occurring. Second, a police officer’s subjective intent bears no weight in determining when that officer’s interaction with the suspect constitutes a search. Third, in evaluating whether an officer has reasonable suspicion that a suspect is armed, courts must look to the totality of the circumstances confronting the officer, as viewed objectively by a reasonable and cautious officer on the scene. When the circumstances give rise to reasonable suspicion that a suspect has a weapon, an officer need not rule out alternative explanations—whether innocent or otherwise—for a suspect’s behavior before deciding to conduct a pat-down for his safety.” United States v. Weaver, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 24251 (2d Cir. Aug. 16, 2021).

This entry was posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Trespass. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.