support@bluetogold.com
or use our live chat
888-579-7796
Customer Service
or use our live chat
Customer Service
RESEARCH
In the early morning hours in a high crime neighborhood, a reliable informant told an officer the defendant, who sitting in a nearby car, possessed narcotics and a weapon. The officer approached the car and asked the defendant to get out. The defendant rolled down the window instead. When he did so, the officer reached into the car and removed the gun from the defendant’s waistband. While the gun was not visible from outside the car, it was in the specific location identified by the reliable source. The defendant was arrested for unlawful possession of a firearm. The subsequent search incident to the arrest uncovered a substantial quantity of heroin.
did so, the officer reached into the car and removed the gun from the defendant’s waistband. While the gun was not visible from outside the car, it was in the specific location identified by the reliable source. The defendant was arrested for unlawful possession of a firearm. The subsequent search incident to the arrest uncovered a substantial quantity of heroin.
Yes. In Terry v. Ohio, the Court recognized that an officer making an investigatory stop may frisk a suspect when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect is armed and dangerous.
Citing Terry, the Court reiterated “so long as [an] officer is entitled to make a forcible stop, and has reason to believe that the suspect is armed and dangerous, he may conduct a weapons search limited in scope to this protective purpose.” Here, the officer relied upon information personally provided to him by a reliable informant. While the information may have been insufficient for an arrest or search warrant, it was reliable enough for the officer’s investigatory stop of the defendant. The defendant was sitting alone, late at night, in a high crime area, and was reportedly carrying narcotics and a weapon by a reliable source. When asked to get out of the vehicle, the defendant remained inside in a position where his movements could not be clearly seen. These facts gave the officer ample reason to fear for his safety and justified the limited intrusion required to obtain the weapon.
407 U.S. 143, 92 S. Ct. 1921 (1972)
© Blue to Gold, LLC. All rights reserved
