Com. v. Amaker, L.
1113 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 1, 2017Background
- Police received a radio “flash” that a black male on crutches wearing a black jacket had a gun on his waist in the Target at 4000 Monument Road.
- Officer Farley entered the store ~2 minutes after the call and saw Appellant exiting the men’s restroom; Appellant matched the flash (black male, black jacket, on crutches).
- Officer observed Appellant glance at him, re-enter the restroom, then followed; in the restroom Appellant stood at the sink and Farley saw a large bulk in the center front of Appellant’s jacket.
- Appellant began to “blade” his body away and lower his arm toward his waist; he ignored repeated commands to keep his hands in view, so Farley grabbed his arms, felt a hard metal object, performed a frisk, and recovered a Mac-11 submachine gun.
- Appellant moved to suppress the gun; the trial court denied the motion, convicted Appellant after a stipulated nonjury trial, and sentenced him. Appellant appealed, arguing the stop/frisk lacked reasonable suspicion.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Amaker's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain and frisk Appellant | Radio flash + close proximity + exact description match + apparent flight + visible bulge + evasive movements + failure to follow commands provided reasonable suspicion and safety basis for a frisk | Officer lacked reasonable suspicion; detention/frisk were unlawful and evidence should be suppressed | Court affirmed: totality of circumstances gave objectively reasonable suspicion; suppression denial upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Eichinger, 915 A.2d 1122 (Pa. 2007) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- Commonwealth v. Walls, 53 A.3d 889 (Pa. Super. 2012) (unprovoked flight plus proximity and matching description can create reasonable suspicion)
- In re L.J., 79 A.3d 1073 (Pa. 2013) (scope of appellate review of suppression limited to suppression-hearing record)
- In the Interest of D.M., 781 A.2d 1161 (Pa. 2001) (anonymous tip plus flight can justify detention and pat-down)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1973) (constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures)