734-359-7018
Now Accepting New Clients!
Blog

CRIMINAL LAW 7: Was initial contact with defendant a Terry stop?


Original Post: 03/12/2018

 

An officer searches a suspect using the terry stop or stop and frisk policy.When is an interaction with an officer questionable?

There are some approaches officers are allowed to take when approaching a citizen. In this case, the officer in question may have used a terry stop to make initial contact with the defendant. Keep reading to learn more about the case and more about Terry Stops. 

What is a Terry Stop or Stop and Frisk Technique?

If you haven't heard of a Terry Stop, maybe you have heard of the more common "stop and frisk" policy. Don't worry, they are the same policy. Under this ruling, an officer who has "reasonable suspicion" that someone is a criminal, they can search them. 

Example of a Case Involving a Terry Stop

The police officer was patrolling an industrial part of the town in an unmarked vehicle on a dirt road when he observed defendant’s vehicle, driving 25 to 30 miles below the speed limit, turning into a closed landscaping business. Officer called for backup, and approximately 10 minutes later, a uniformed officer arrived in a marked police car. The two officers entered the landscaping business and found defendant standing outside his vehicle in the parking lot. As the officers approached, defendant told them that they were on private property, that he was an employee of the business, and asked them to leave.

When the officers approached defendant, he showed them an identification card indicating that he was an employee of the business, and explained that he was picking up some equipment for the morning. However, while engaging in this interaction, Officer noticed that defendant was speaking slowly, almost slurring his words, and was visibly shaking. The officer concluded that defendant was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. After defendant failed several of the standard sobriety tests, he was placed under arrest for impaired driving. His car was searched thereafter, and approximately 12 hydrocodone tablets were found in a prescription bottle in defendant’s vehicle.

Defendant was ultimately charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated, possession of a controlled substance, and operating a vehicle on a suspended or revoked license. Defendant then moved to suppress all evidence stemming from his arrest on the grounds that the evidence was obtained during an unconstitutional search and seizure.

The fact that the officers subjected defendant to a Terry stop does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment.  Whether an officer has a reasonable suspicion to make such an investigatory stop is determined case by case, on the basis of an analysis of the totality of the facts and circumstances.

The prosecution points to the following facts in order to demonstrate reasonable suspicion.  First, that this was a “directed patrol” and that there had recently been burglaries in the area. Second, that defendant was driving unusually slowly on an empty, unlit dirt road at about 12:30 a.m. Third, that defendant entered a business that was closed and did so at a time during which it was very unlikely that business would be conducted and remained there for over 10 minutes, which was when the police entered.

The court concluded that given the facts of this case, driving unusually slowly in an isolated area and then entering into a closed and gated business in the early morning hours was sufficient to reasonably suspect that defendant might be engaged in criminal activity and to conduct a brief investigatory stop.

Get Experienced Legal Defense for Your OWI Charge

There is no denying that Michigan has harsh punishments for operating a vehicle while intoxicated; jail, probation, and license suspension are all possible. You can find the strong advocate you require at Aldrich Legal Services, in Plymouth, Michigan. If you are facing operating while intoxicated (OWI) charges as an adult or as a minor, we can fight on your behalf quickly and effectively.

FAMILY LAW 53: The trial court erred by treating the parties’ GAL as an LGAL and denying the parties the right to question her at a hearing; however, the trial court did not err in requiring the parties to compensate the GAL for her services.

Plaintiff and Defendant were never married, but share a young son who was born in 2016. The parties have battled over custody, child support, and other parenting issues ever since. In the spring of 2019, the parties filed competing motions to modify...

The Difference Between Theft, Robbery, and Burglary

Original Post: 1/11/2019 Often, burglary, robbery, and theft are used interchangeably even though there are distinct differences between all of them. Though, what all three do have in common is they may involve the unlawful taking of...

REAL ESTATE 59: Concluding that the one-year period contained in the parties’ home purchase agreement was not a statute of limitations, but rather akin to a statute of repose, and that it was plain and unambiguous, the court held that it barred plai

BACKGROUND On March 12, 2016, the parties entered into an agreement for the purchase of defendants’ home. The purchase agreement contained the following clause: TIME FOR LEGAL ACTION: Buyer and Seller agree that any legal action against...

CRIMINAL LAW 16: The trial court did not err in refusing to order a Daubert hearing as to the reliability of the DataMaster breathalyzer device as MCL 257.625a(6)(a) shows the Legislature has determined that the device’s results are valid and reliabl

UNDERLYING FACTS In the early afternoon of November 4, 2016, defendant was pulled over after an officer was dispatched for a possible drunk driver. The officer had defendant exit his vehicle and perform several field sobriety tests. Those tests...

FAMILY LAW 52: Defendant-mother was not entitled to relief on her claim the trial court did not comply with the requirements for a de novo hear, the trial court did not err in using the preponderance of the evidence standard, and its best interest f

PERTINENT FACTS In July 2017, plaintiff and defendant divorced by consent judgment. Under the judgment of divorce, the parties shared joint legal and physical custody of their three minor children. On September 24, 2018, plaintiff filed a motion...

Are you required to provide ID as a passenger?

Original Post: 05/14/2017 The preceding is for informational purposes only. Being stopped by the police is not usually a pleasant experience. Even with the most benign of infractions, the encounter can be adversarial. The idea of...

DIVORCE 45: Federal law preempts state law such that the parties’ consent judgment is unenforceable to the extent that it required defendant to reimburse plaintiff for the reduction in the amount payable to her due to his election to receive CRSC

BACKGROUND This case involves a dispute between former spouses who entered into a consent judgment of divorce (the consent judgment), which provided that defendant would pay plaintiff 50% of his military retirement benefits. Beyond that, the...

How to Choose a Criminal Defense Lawyer for a DUI

No one wants to be arrested, and if you are, especially for the first time, you can be very confused. Being arrested for Drunk Driving, Driving Under the Influence (DUI) or Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) - formerly Driving While Intoxicated (DWI)...

What does Client and Attorney Privilege Mean?

How much should you tell your lawyer? The fifth amendment protects U.S. citizens from incriminating themselves, but how does that work with your attorney. We get this question all the time. Many people have heard about attorney confidentiality,...

Don't let a bad decision, unfair contract, or a messy divorce get in the way of a promising future!
Contact the experienced team at Aldrich Legal Services today to schedule your free initial
consultation
and secure reliable and trustworthy representation today!
Get the Help You Need From a Team You Can Truly Count On: (734) 404-3000
734-237-6482
734-366-4405