United States v. Dortch

The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence of a firearm from a pat-down. The court held that the pat-down was constitutional because the officer did not search or seize defendant in a constitutional sense until the pat-down, which was justified by reasonable suspicion. In this case, the short stretch of street where the officer encountered defendant had a more specific and direct connection to guns, defendant's heavy coat was unseasonable in June and was thus unusual and suspicious, defendant had an apparent association with two illegally stopped vehicles in which guns had been found, and defendant's movements were suggestive of concealment and preparation for action. View "United States v. Dortch" on Justia Law