Com. v. Mickel, T.
47 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 22, 2017Background
- On June 30, 2016, Officer Matthew Lehman stopped Tyshaun Mickel’s car for expired registration and observed Mickel make movements toward the center console as Lehman approached.
- Lehman called for backup, removed Mickel from the vehicle, conducted a Terry frisk (finding a drill bit), and performed a limited protective sweep of the passenger compartment for weapons.
- During the sweep Lehman saw a soft eyeglasses case with copper filaments (Chore Boy) protruding; he associated the item with drug use.
- Lehman then used the vehicle’s keys found on the dashboard to unlock a locked glove compartment without Mickel’s consent, and discovered drug paraphernalia and suspected controlled substances.
- Mickel was charged with drug offenses; he moved to suppress the evidence. The suppression court granted the motion, finding no articulable facts supporting a belief that a weapon was in the locked glove box and that finding Chore Boy did not establish probable cause for the glove box search.
- The Commonwealth appealed; the Superior Court affirmed the suppression order, holding the glove box search exceeded the scope of a protective Long search and lacked probable cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Mickel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether opening the locked glove compartment was permitted under Long (protective search for weapons) | Officer Lehman reasonably feared for safety given defendant’s furtive movements and locations within reach, so he could search areas where a weapon might be hidden, including the glove box | No reasonable, articulable facts supported a belief a weapon was in the locked glove box; protective search did not extend to unlocking and rummaging through it | Search exceeded Long’s scope; no reasonable belief defendant was armed such that glove box search was justified (affirmed) |
| Whether discovery of Chore Boy and observed behavior supplied probable cause to search glove box for drugs | Presence of Chore Boy, furtive movements, and nervousness provided probable cause to search for drugs and paraphernalia | Chore Boy alone (found in eyeglasses case/back seat), without more, does not create probable cause to unlock glove box and search its containers | Finding Chore Boy without additional corroborating facts did not establish probable cause; the search was a warrantless contraband search, not a protective weapons search (affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983) (permits search of passenger-compartment areas where a weapon may be hidden if officer has reasonable, articulable belief suspect is dangerous and could access weapon)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (authorizes limited stop-and-frisk based on reasonable suspicion for officer safety)
- Commonwealth v. Morris, 644 A.2d 721 (Pa. 1994) (applies Long standard in Pennsylvania and upholds search of passenger-compartment container large enough to hold a weapon based on specific articulable facts)
- Commonwealth v. Runyan, 160 A.3d 831 (Pa. Super. 2017) (warrantless search requires more than mere suspicion; isolated indicia of drug use do not automatically create probable cause)
- Commonwealth v. Lechner, 685 A.2d 1014 (Pa. 1996) (police need more than mere suspicion or good-faith belief to justify warrantless search)