Tomorrow's opinions, May 28, 2009
Tomorrow the Washington Supreme Court will issue a ruling in at least one case.
State v. Garvin, No. 80941-1 (case briefs and argument). Are police officers limited to pat downs, or can they “squeeze” a defendant’s pockets to determine the nature of objects in the pocket? An officer pulled Anthony Garvin over for a traffic infraction. When he noticed a knife on the seat next to Garvin, the officer ordered Garvin out of the car and conducted a search for additional weapons. In the process he discovered a baggie of methamphetamine. At trial the officer testified, “We don’t really pat anymore. It’s more of a squeeze search.”
Garvin argues that the officer is not allowed to manipulate objects within the clothing, and squeeze method exceeds the scope of a valid frisk under the "stop and frisk" rule articulated in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). He moved to suppress the evidence seized, and the trial court denied the motion. Garvin was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, and Court of Appeals upheld the conviction.
"If, during a lawful stop based on reasonable suspicion, the officer conducts a frisk and feels an object whose contour or mass makes its identity as contraband immediately apparent, it may be withdrawn and examined." ~1
How could a baggie feel like a knife?
1~ http://tri-statedefenderonline.com/