Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. STATEN, 14-0006-01-CR-W-HFS. (2015)

Court: District Court, W.D. Missouri Number: infdco20150205a90 Visitors: 4
Filed: Feb. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER HOWARD F. SACHS, District Judge. Defendant has filed a motion to suppress which the Magistrate Judge recommends be denied. Doc. 34. Defendant emphasizes some different clothing items from those described by witnesses and contends that the police were unjustifiably prone to investigate all Black males in the general neighborhood with a similar hair style. As shown by the Magistrate Judge, the stop was justified by more than defendant relies on. Eye witness mistakes are common enough to ju
More

ORDER

HOWARD F. SACHS, District Judge.

Defendant has filed a motion to suppress which the Magistrate Judge recommends be denied. Doc. 34. Defendant emphasizes some different clothing items from those described by witnesses and contends that the police were unjustifiably prone to investigate all Black males in the general neighborhood with a similar hair style. As shown by the Magistrate Judge, the stop was justified by more than defendant relies on. Eye witness mistakes are common enough to justify police investigations going beyond the items recalled. Evasive conduct by individuals needs not actually relate to the misconduct under investigation, but evasive conduct is a significant suspicious factor justifying a Terry stop.

Having reviewed the record and the briefing I ADOPT the report and recommendation, and DENY the motion to suppress (Doc. 19) for reasons stated in the report.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer