Use of handcuffs during a stop and frisk does not necessarily convert the stop into an arrest. United States v. Teah, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116652 (D. Mass. August 20, 2012)*:<\/p>\n
To show that the use of handcuffs in a Terry stop does not exceed Terry’s limits and convert the stop into a de facto arrest, officers “must be able to point to some specific fact or circumstance that could have supported a reasonable belief that the use of such restraints was necessary to carry out the legitimate purposes of the stop without exposing law enforcement officers, the public, or the suspect himself to an undue risk of harm.” United States v. Acosta-Colon<\/a>, 157 F.3d 9, 18-19 (1st Cir. 1998) (emphasis omitted). That showing has been made here.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Defense counsel withdrew the claim that a failure of knock-and-announce voided the arrest because the officers didn\u2019t tell the defendant what he was being arrested for, but defendant persisted. Even if that was violation of knock-and-announce, which isn\u2019t conceded, it isn\u2019t suppressible under Hudson. United States v. Bartlett, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116990 (D. Me. July 31, 2012).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading