MEMORANDUM REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

(Dkt. No. 39)

MICHAEL A. PONSOR, District Judge.

On October 6, 2014, Defendant filed his Motion to Suppress. On November 24, 2014, the court heard evidence from two police officers in connection with the motion. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court orally denied the Motion to Suppress, setting forth its reasons and stating that a memorandum would issue. On the same day, the clerk docketed the court's ruling denying the motion.

The reasons for the court's ruling are straightforward. The underlying facts as they emerged at the hearing confirmed that officers of the Springfield Police Department approached Defendant informally while he was standing near a convenience store. One of the officers said to Defendant words to the effect of "Hey, what's up?" In response, Defendant drew a firearm from his waistband and swept it across his body so that it was briefly pointed at the officer. Defendant then immediately turned and ran. One of the officers pursued Defendant, and Defendant eventually tossed the gun away. After Defendant was placed under arrest, the firearm was located.

No authority in any way limits a police officer's right to informally approach another person on the street. As soon as Defendant displayed the weapon, briefly placing the police officer in danger, and began to run, the officers had probable cause to pursue and arrest him. No aspect of the Fourth Amendment, or any authority construing it, offers any basis for suppression under these circumstances.

For these reasons, the court has DENIED Defendant's Motion to Suppress.

It is So Ordered.