Practice Areas

Blog

Legal News

Library

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: My cousin was talking with a group of friends on the street when a police car slowly drove by. My cousin saw the officer looking over the group of them very intensely and decided that he'd better get out of there because he was afraid the police were looking for one of his friends. However, when he began walking away the police car stopped and the officer followed him and asked him to stop, which he did. The officer then began questioning him and started to search him and found some contraband. He was then put under arrest. Isn't this illegal?

A:

It certainly sounds like the officer may have overstepped his legal boundaries. Under the Terry doctrine, police may stop citizens if they have an articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. They may question the person for a brief amount of time (usually, anything over 20 minutes is deemed unreasonable) and, if they fear that the person may have a weapon, conduct a pat down of the outer clothing of the person for weapons such as a gun or a knife. But each case is analyzed on its own facts.

Recently, the Virginia Court of Appeals threw out a man's conviction for possession of a firearm that was found when the police stopped and questioned him under similar circumstances. The only arguments that the Commonwealth made to justify the officer's decision to stop the man was that he was in a "high crime" area known to be a place where illegal drug transactions were conducted, and that he refused to stop when he walked away from them as they approached the group he was conversing with.

The Court of Appeals explained the police officer lacked sufficient facts to support a reasonable suspicion that the defendant was engaged in criminal activity when he walked briskly away when the officer approached him in a “high crime area.” The officer testified that, as he approached, he did not observe the defendant or anyone else in the group engaged in criminal activity. The defendant’s mere presence in a “high crime area” is insufficient as a matter of law to provide reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop under Terry. Furthermore, the defendant’s “brisk” walk some fifteen feet to a nearby townhouse did not constitute “headlong flight” from the scene.

The Court of Appeals also said the defendant’s refusal to heed the officer’s requests to stop did not advance the Commonwealth's contention that the seizure was supported by reasonable suspicion. The Court of Appeals explained that persons who are not under arrest or otherwise detained have every right to refuse or ignore requests from law enforcement officers.

Free Reports

Free Case Evaluation

FAQs