Reasonable Suspicion?

[5711-Marine]

The 5th circuit court held that
"Chambering A Round While Driving With No Hands on The Wheel Creates Reasonable Suspicion to Pull Over Vehicle"

http://www.fifthcircuit.org/OPINIONS...9/08ka0456.pdf

Be careful as you enter states bordering Maryland and return your weapon to a ready condition...

[Carnes]

Wow. They are chewing away at peoples rights once again. The judge sacrifices peoples freedom to remain free from unnecessary searches just because he knew the guy was a thug, and he wanted to put him away. It is good to put bad guys away, but at what cost?

I don't recommend loading and unloading while on the hi-way, but I've done it. I guess that makes me suspect now. Just one more method added to a nearly all inclusive list of ways for a police officer to be able to stop and question a law abiding citizen.

Next, defendant specifically argues that Detective Peterson did not have
"probable cause to conduct an investigatory stop of the Anderson's vehicle."
Although defendant did not provide further support for his claim, we will review
whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Louisiana
Constitution Article 1, § 5 protect individuals from unreasonable searches and
seizures. State v. Micelotti, 07-700 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2/6/08), 979 So.2d 573, 576.
-8-
Law enforcement officers are authorized by La. C.Cr.P. art. 215.1, as well as state
and federal jurisprudence, to perform investigatory stops to interrogate a person
who is reasonably suspected of criminal activity. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88
S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); State v. Micelotti, supra.
During a Terry stop, as codified in La. C.Cr.P. art. 215.1, a police officer is
authorized to stop an individual in a public place whom the officer reasonably
suspects is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime. State v.
Micelotti, 979 So.2d at 576. The officer can demand that individuals give their
identity and explain their actions. M.
Reasonable suspicion necessary for an investigatory stop is something less
than probable cause. I_d. Whether a police officer had sufficient knowledge of the
facts and circumstances to justify an infringement on the individual's right to be
free from governmental interference must be determined by the facts of each case.
Id.
A police officer must have a particularized and objective basis for suspecting
the particular person that is stopped has been connected with criminal activity, in
order to make an investigatory stop. State v. Micelotti, 979 So.2d at 576. A
particularized and objective basis for suspecting the individual of criminal activity
requires the officer to point to specific and articulable facts that justify the
investigatory stop. M.
The police, however, do not have to observe what they know to be criminal
behavior before investigating. State v. Ayche, 07-753 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08),
978 So.2d 1143, 1149(citing State v. Benjamin, 97-3065 (La. 12/1/98), 722 So.2d
988, 989). Rather, the requirement is that the officers have a reasonable suspicion
of criminal activity. Id.
-9-
An investigatory stop is illegal without reasonable suspicion, and the
evidence seized from that stop is suppressible. State v. Micelotti, 979 So.2d at
576. "The credibility of witnesses at a suppression hearing is within the sound
discretion of the trier of fact, who may accept or reject, in whole or in part, the
testimony of any witness." State v. Micelotti, 979 So.2d at 577. A trial court's
denial of the defendant's motion to suppress is afforded great weight, and it will
not be set aside unless the preponderance of the evidence clearly favors
suppression. Id.
An appellate court must consider the totality of the circumstances, while
giving deference to the inferences and deductions of trained officers that might
elude an untrained person. M. In determining whether a motion to suppress ruling
was correct, an appellate court may consider the evidence adduced at the motion to
suppress hearing, as well as all pertinent evidence presented at the trial. I_d.
In the present case, Detective Peterson, a law enforcement officer with
approximately 10 years experience, observed the defendant chambering a round
into a firearm while driving with no hands on the wheel. Detective Peterson
testified that, although he did not witness the defendant committing a specific
crime, he stopped the defendant to investigate because "[he] did not know if a
crime had been committed or was about to be committed."
We cannot say that the trial court erred in finding that Detective Peterson
had sufficient reasonable suspicion that a crime was being committed, had been
committed, or was about to be committed to justify an investigatory stop.
Detective Peterson did not have to observe what he knew to be criminal behavior
before investigating but rather behavior he reasonably suspected may become
criminal activity.

[PennsyPlinker]

I think some of this is right on the edge, but if I was riding next to a cop and I took both my hands off the wheel for anything, I would not be surprised to be pulled over. I didn't do the research, but I am pretty sure that Pa. law frowns on people riding along in their car without steering it, even if only for a few seconds at a time.

Am guilty of doing it on occasion?

Sure.

But I am not stupid enough to do it when someone is looking, especially when that someone has the power to arrest me! But even more than that, there is some social responsibility there. I won't take my hands off my wheel when in proximity to other vehicles because just like self defense, defensive driving needs occur in a split second of time, and there is often no time to spend reattaching my hands to the steering wheel.

So I think the cop may have been stretching it just a little to say that he thought a crime might have been committed regarding the presence of a gun, but certainly the guy was guilty of failure to control his vehicle, or whatever it is they call it here in Pa. I see plenty of people riding down the road on a regular basis talking on the phone with one hand and waving the other one around in the air. I almost had a head on collision with a woman two days ago because she drifted over into my lane while reading a road map! It was all over the steering wheel and halfway up the driver's side window! And, she was intending to make a left turn according to what she apparently learned from that map. Who cares about other cars? They'll get out of the way!

I think too many times we are ready to get angry at the police and the court system because of inefficiency, abuse of power, etc, but I think this one was a good call.

[marinakorp]

How about if you have your hands on the bottom side of the steering wheel...like near your lap.

THe cop can't see that I have my hands on the wheel...what crima am I committing, about to commit?

[adymond]

/me is torn on this.

Okay this is tough. The safe handeling of a firearm does not include chambering a round while traveling in excess of 60 MPH. Should there be some punishment for unsafe handeling of said firearm and unsafe operation of a motor vehicle? I think so, but should the LEO then have reason to search my vehicle? Not so long as I provide my license, registration, proof of insurance and LtcF since in order to be in posession of a loaded firearm in my vehicle I need the LtcF.

[mythaeus]

While the defendant's story can easily be a completely lie, the idea of a trial is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt of someone's guilt. The defendant's story puts doubt in my mind. Truth can be stranger than fiction and God forbids one day the dominoes fall against my favor from a view by a single witness, I hope the benefit of the doubt is on my side, however strange my story may be.

Al

[kevco]

I am pretty sure I could tell the difference between a HANDGUN and a CELLPHONE!
Think the "fiance'" could be brought up on charges for storing a gun in her car? How the hell do you "forget" you have your gun with you in the car? I smell something funny myself....

[mythaeus]

I am pretty sure I could tell the difference between a HANDGUN and a CELLPHONE!
Think the "fiance'" could be brought up on charges for storing a gun in her car? How the hell do you "forget" you have your gun with you in the car? I smell something funny myself....

For some odd reason, the officer couldn't remember whether the window was up or down! Hmm...

Al

[Mtn Jack]

Pennsy now you know as well as i, that we can steer with our bellys ifin our buttons aint stuck to our backbones. Whats not safe about that, we is still stearing. Gotto go i am hungry. Mtn Jack

[adymond]

For some odd reason, the officer couldn't remember whether the window was up or down! Hmm...

Al

That's a stretch. I don't trust the LEO, but to determine reasonable doubt based on the fact that an LEO can't remember if a window was up or down when they first saw a vehicle is weak.