The legality of the search when someone is detained will always be based upon the initial stop. Cole is right to question how this guy got stopped to be later searched.

To stop someone, you need reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion must be based on articulable facts that would indicate that a person is about to commit a crime, committing the crime or has committed the crime. Look up Florida Statutes 901.151. If the officer has reasonable suspicion, he can temporarily detain an individual. If he has probable cause, he can arrest them. Once that individual is detained, the officer may conduct a limited pat down for officer safety. This limited pad down for officer safety is called a Terry stop. It cannot be used a pretext for the patdown, the reasonable suspicion must come first. Finding something after a detention where there is no reasonable suspicion shall result in suppression. In other words, the legality of the stop is never saved by the result of the search. In this case, the pocket knife being "close" is not a valid basis for the stop. A "close" pocket knife would not be visible or immediately apparent to justify the use of force and its specifically exempted.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

I quoted in my previous post:

"Freddie Gray made eye contact with police officers in his west Baltimore neighborhood.... (He then) fled unprovoked upon noticing police presence."

I'm not sure if there are diffs in that regard between FL and MD laws, but would his fleeing as soon as he saw a cop constitute reasonable suspicion? (in MD)

I asked google.
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/...ply-a-double-standard/

"Felony running doesn't exist and you can't arrest someone for looking you in the eye,"

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Google gave you a nice article, but you only cited the opinion of a Gray family lawyer.

The rest of the article discusses much of the "Gray area" (no pun intended) related to the pursue/detain criteria.

Cops often have to act on instinct in those situations, and when a determination can't be made confidently in the field, let someone at a higher pay grade downtown figure it out.

That's no excuse to abuse the "we weren't sure" clause or use excessive force, but there was precedent for what happened in Gray's case.

• Probable cause, and possesion of an automaic knife.
• March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
• March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
• January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
• January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
• December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
• December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
• August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
• January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
• September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
• April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
• July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
• March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
• March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
• February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
• August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
• August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
• August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
• July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)

 

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

Edited: 07/28/2016 at 11:59 AM by crankit

They didn't know he had a knife until he was stopped.

-------------------------
I was right.

Also, you cannot detain or arrest "bad" people for their bad past. The theory that bad people do bad things violates the requirement that an officer must observe something more than mere suspicion. A stop must be made on the basis of reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime being committed. Running from a law enforcement is not a crime, but ironically, because it was litigated so much, it was determined to provide reasonable suspicion to detain, not arrest in Florida. All citizens have a right to refuse contact with police officers and cannot be compelled to engage UNLESS they are lawfully detained, in which case they must identify themselves and nothing more.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

That I did.

"Felony running doesn't exist and you can't arrest someone for looking you in the eye,"

The article did a decent job of pointing out how it's sadly not so true for some people.
People like Freddie.

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Innocent until proven guilty

in a court of law.

Unless you are black...

-------------------------
GOP:

Gaslight
Obstruct
Project

Maryland (Baltimore) law

§ 25-1 Public places.

 

Share This Law

Stay Updated

 

 

(a) Definitions.

(1) Loiter.

“Loiter” means:

(i)to stand around or remain or to park or remain parked in a motor vehicle at a public
place or place open to the public and to engage in any conduct prohibited under this
law; or

(ii)to collect, gather, congregate, or to be a member of a group or a crowd of people who
are gathered together in any public place or place open to the public and to engage in
any conduct prohibited under this law.

(2) Place open to the public.

(i)“Place open to the public” means any place open to the public or any place to which the
public is invited and in, on, or around any privately owned place of business, private
parking lot, or private institution, including places of worship, cemetery, or any place of
amusement and entertainment, whether or not a charge of admission or entry thereto is
made.

(ii)It includes the elevator, lobby, halls, corridors, and areas open to the public of any store,
office, or apartment building.

(3) Public place.

“Public place” means any public street, road, or highway, alley, lane, sidewalk, crosswalk, or
other public way, or any public resort, place of amusement, park, playground, public building
or grounds appurtenant thereto, public parking lot, or any vacant lot.

(b) Prohibited loitering.

(1)It shall be unlawful for any person to loiter at, on, or in a public place or place open to the
public in such manner:

(i)to interfere with, impede, or hinder the free passage of pedestrian or vehicular traffic;

(ii)to interfere with, obstruct, harass, curse, or threaten or to do physical harm to another
member or members of the public; or

(iii) that by words, acts, or other conduct, it is clear that there is a reasonable likelihood a
breach of the peace or disorderly conduct shall result.

(2)It shall be unlawful for any person to loiter at a public place or place open to the public and to
fail to obey the direction of a uniformed police officer or the direction of a properly identified
police officer not in uniform to move on, when not to obey such direction shall endanger the
public peace.

(c) Scope.

(1)No person shall be charged with a violation of this section unless and until the arresting
officer has first warned the person of the violation and the person has failed or refused to stop
the violation.

(2)Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit orderly picketing or other lawful assembly.

(d) Penalties.

Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction thereof, shall be subject to a fine of not more than $500 or imprisonment for not
more than 10 days, or both fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court.
(City Code, 1976/83, art. 19, §58B.) (Ord. 79-1195.)

 

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

Obviously, he was endangering the public peace enough to warrant a broken neck.

-------------------------
GOP:

Gaslight
Obstruct
Project

Beyond Stupid ^^^^

 

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

What if he wasn't breaking the law? What if he didn't try to evade and escape in the first place? What if he just smiled and waived? What if he just complied? Crooked F.in cops...

How does search whoever you want fit into the Constitution?

-------------------------
I was right.

The Constitution created three branches of government, one of which is the judicial.

This branch interprets laws in things called court cases.

Court cases establish precedent, which may be used by other courts and law enforcement officers.

SCOTUS ruled on a similar issue in 2000:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._Wardlow



You may or may not agree with the ruling, but you can't pick and choose which SCOTUS rulings apply and which don't.

You are right, I don't agree...I guess it's the Libertarian in me.

The Gray case ended up in the SC and the 4 to 3 decision gave the police the right to apprehend... if an outstanding warrant is involved. Too much grey area for my tastes.

-------------------------
I was right.

What if a frog had wings--wouldn't bump his ass when he jumped--Stoopid Libs!

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

Hey crank, what about those Trump crime statistics?

-------------------------
I was right.