Com. v. Jones, J.
519 WDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 24, 2016Background
- Around 2:30 a.m. on Dec. 21, 2013, Pittsburgh officers broadcast a BOLO describing a red Mercedes (driver: heavyset Black male in a white t‑shirt) and a red Dodge associated with an incident involving a firearm.
- Officer Desaro observed a red Mercedes matching the BOLO, followed it, and the vehicle stopped without the officer activating lights.
- The driver (Jones) exited, matched the BOLO description, and, fearing a weapon, Officer Desaro drew his gun, ordered Jones to the ground, and handcuffed him.
- After Jones was secured, Officers Desaro and Nino saw a loaded handgun in plain view on the passenger seat of the Mercedes and seized it.
- Jones was charged with prohibited person in possession of a firearm, carrying a firearm without a license, and driving on a suspended license; he lost a bench trial and was sentenced to 2–4 years.
- Jones filed a suppression motion alleging unlawful detention/arrest, unlawful warrantless search, and involuntary/confession-based statements; the trial court denied suppression and the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Jones' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether detention handcuffing/ordering to ground constituted an unlawful arrest | The show of force, guns drawn, order to the ground, and immediate handcuffing made the encounter an arrest (not a Terry stop) | The encounter was a brief investigative detention justified by reasonable suspicion from the BOLO and radio corroboration; handcuffs were for officer safety | Affirmed: detention was a permissible investigative stop supported by reasonable suspicion; did not rise to arrest |
| Whether officers lawfully seized the gun from the vehicle without a warrant (plain view) | Even if visible, the gun was not necessarily contraband so plain view exception did not apply | Gun was in plain view and BOLO/radio facts gave officers probable cause to believe it was connected to criminal activity | Affirmed: firearm seizure fell within plain view/probable cause under the totality of circumstances |
| Whether Jones' statements about the firearm should be suppressed as fruits of an illegal arrest / involuntary | Statements flowed from illegal arrest and were involuntary, thus inadmissible | No illegal arrest occurred; plus Jones failed to timely object below, so claim waived | Affirmed: suppression not warranted; claim waived for failure to preserve objections |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (authorizes brief investigative stops and limited protective searches for weapons)
- Commonwealth v. Jackson, 698 A.2d 571 (Pa. 1997) (anonymous tip cases; limits on relying solely on tip for Terry stop)
- Commonwealth v. Rosas, 875 A.2d 341 (Pa. Super. 2005) (defines investigative detention and reasonable suspicion standard)
- Commonwealth v. Guillespie, 745 A.2d 654 (Pa. 2000) (protective search under Terry must be limited to weapon discovery)
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 982 A.2d 90 (Pa. Super. 2009) (plain view doctrine for incriminating objects in vehicles)