"CYPHER, J. This is an appeal by the Commonwealth after a
single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court allowed the
Commonwealth's petition under Mass.R.Crim.P. 15, as appearing in
422 Mass. 1501 (1996). In ruling on the defendants' motions to
suppress, a judge in the Superior Court held that the seizure by
police officers of a firearm found under a passenger's seat
during a "patfrisk" of the interior of a motor vehicle was
impermissible because, although the stop of the vehicle was
justified, the police had exceeded the permissible scope of the
search when they looked under the passenger's seat before the
occupants returned to the vehicle. Specifically, the judge
reasoned that "[a]ny suspicion which might have been prompted by
any movement (or lack thereof) by the car's occupants was
dispelled by the removal and pat frisk of each individual's
person."
3 We reverse the order allowing the motions to suppress."
http://ift.tt/YQgjTf
Basically, 4 gang members are in a vehicle making movements, acting funny. Some of the guys are known to the detectives for either carrying firearms or being involved in violence/drugs. Vehicle is stopped for no blinker. Occupants are ordered to exit and pat frisked. Pat frisk of them reveals nothing. Pat frisk of car finds revolver.
Defense says "wait you can't pat frisk the car if you don't find anything on my client". Negative my friend. The point of a pat frisk is to stop them from sitting back in car and shooting you in face or someone else.
Note: above is very SHORT synopsis. Read the case for a really good example of what RAS is and how it works/ is built. The defendant's motions, what he says, how well he's known, his movements before they got in the car, who was with, what the group was doing prior, there being current rival gang tensions, ALL build RAS needed.
This is not an example of OC, but it's certainly an example of how every little detail can be used to build RAS and extremely fast.
single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court allowed the
Commonwealth's petition under Mass.R.Crim.P. 15, as appearing in
422 Mass. 1501 (1996). In ruling on the defendants' motions to
suppress, a judge in the Superior Court held that the seizure by
police officers of a firearm found under a passenger's seat
during a "patfrisk" of the interior of a motor vehicle was
impermissible because, although the stop of the vehicle was
justified, the police had exceeded the permissible scope of the
search when they looked under the passenger's seat before the
occupants returned to the vehicle. Specifically, the judge
reasoned that "[a]ny suspicion which might have been prompted by
any movement (or lack thereof) by the car's occupants was
dispelled by the removal and pat frisk of each individual's
person."
3 We reverse the order allowing the motions to suppress."
http://ift.tt/YQgjTf
Basically, 4 gang members are in a vehicle making movements, acting funny. Some of the guys are known to the detectives for either carrying firearms or being involved in violence/drugs. Vehicle is stopped for no blinker. Occupants are ordered to exit and pat frisked. Pat frisk of them reveals nothing. Pat frisk of car finds revolver.
Defense says "wait you can't pat frisk the car if you don't find anything on my client". Negative my friend. The point of a pat frisk is to stop them from sitting back in car and shooting you in face or someone else.
Note: above is very SHORT synopsis. Read the case for a really good example of what RAS is and how it works/ is built. The defendant's motions, what he says, how well he's known, his movements before they got in the car, who was with, what the group was doing prior, there being current rival gang tensions, ALL build RAS needed.
This is not an example of OC, but it's certainly an example of how every little detail can be used to build RAS and extremely fast.
COMMONWEALTH vs. JASON DOUGLAS Pat Frisk of Vehicle
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire