Showing posts with label Pat Down. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pat Down. Show all posts

What happens when a suspect throws drugs away and the cops find them?

Drug Crimes, Drug Attorney, pat down, inevitable discovery, abandonment, traffic stop, 4th Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Stop and Frisk
Fourth Amendment Search

What happens when a suspect throws down drugs and the cops later find them?


Where drug crime defendants / suspects throw  drugs under their vehicles while being removed from the vehicle after a valid traffic stop, a court can rule that the suspect has "voluntarily abandoned" the drugs. A Florida Court has just ruled there was reasonable suspicion to justify a pat down where there was a traffic stop, the target appeared nervous, could not answer some of the officer's questions, had made a sudden U-turn into an oncoming traffic lane,  and then parked facing the wrong direction just prior to the stop. The cop testified that the suspect had a pen clenched in his hand and the officer to believed it could be used as a weapon.

Drug Pat Down | Tampa Case Reversed

Drug Pat Down Search
Drug Defense Attorney recently reviewed a court ruling where drugs were suppressed after an illegal pat down. The court found there had been  a warrantless search. The trial judge ruled a Pat down was lawful. The Appeals panel reversed the circuit judge, ruling that the officers did not have reasonable suspicion. The defendant did not comply with an officers' requests to keep his hands out of his pockets. That fact was insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion. Motion to suppress drugs found during pat down should have been granted.

Case Quote:

"For a weapons pat-down search to be valid, an officer must identify objective facts indicating that the person detained is armed and dangerous. See Howell v. State, 725 So. 2d 429, 431 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). But here, the only justification provided by the officers was the fact that Dawson refused to comply with their requests to keep his hands out of his pockets. That fact—standing alone—was insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion. The comment made by one officer that he believed Dawson "could have contraband or a weapon" was simply unsupported by any identifiable objective facts to lead him to that conclusion."

"Because "routine patdown searches based on general concern for officer safety are not constitutionally permitted," McNeil v. State, 995 So. 2d 525, 526 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008), the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct a pat-down search of Dawson and the trial court erred by denying the suppression motion."

The Complete Drug Pat Down Opinion can be read  here.

Source: 36 Fla. L. Weekly D804a



Pat Down Search in Your Case? Call for a Free Telephone Consultation 1-877-793-9290.