224 A.3d 1104
Pa. Super. Ct.2019Background
- Officers investigating threats at Club Onyx saw a black Hyundai parked in a travel lane of South Columbus Boulevard and later returned to effect a traffic stop for improper parking.
- Appellant Davon Wright was the sole occupant; officers asked for license/registration and why he was parked there; Wright said he was using his cell phone.
- Officer Lang observed Wright repeatedly reach with his left hand toward a left pant-pocket and with his right hand toward the gearshift; officers feared Wright might drive off.
- Officer Lang ordered Wright out of the vehicle; Wright delayed and continued reaching; when Lang opened the door he saw Wright wearing a ballistic vest and a windbreaker with a heavily weighted front pocket.
- Officers forcibly removed Wright, heard a clanking sound when he hit the ground, reached under him, felt and seized a loaded Glock 19; Wright’s carry permit proved invalid.
- Wright’s suppression motion was denied, he was convicted of firearm- and body-armor-related offenses, and he appealed arguing the detention/search exceeded the stop’s scope and lacked reasonable suspicion.
Issues
| Issue | Wright's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers exceeded the permissible scope/time of the traffic stop by detaining and searching Wright | The stop was limited to issuing a citation; officers prolonged the detention and searched without reasonable suspicion | Officers lawfully asked routine questions and could order Wright out; his reaching and a weighted pocket gave reasonable suspicion to frisk/remove him | Court held the initial stop/questions lawful and officers developed reasonable suspicion to remove and frisk Wright; suppression denial affirmed |
| Whether forcible removal from the vehicle was lawful | Forcible removal exceeded what was necessary for a routine stop | Officer safety and Wright’s repeated reaching toward a pocket/gearshift justified forcible removal | Court held forcible removal permissible given safety concerns and evolving reasonable suspicion |
| Whether the firearm seizure and subsequent search were lawful | Seizure/search lacked independent reasonable suspicion and should be suppressed | Clanking and officer’s tactile detection provided probable cause; search incident to arrest was valid | Court held seizure lawful; probable cause supported arrest and search-incident-to-arrest exception applied |
Key Cases Cited
- Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1984) (officer may ask routine, moderate questions during a traffic stop)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (approves limited frisk for officer safety when reasonably suspect a person is armed)
- Commonwealth v. Pratt, 930 A.2d 561 (Pa. Super. 2007) (officer may order driver out of vehicle during a traffic stop)
- Commonwealth v. Mack, 953 A.2d 587 (Pa. Super. 2008) (reaching movements in vehicle can support reasonable belief suspect is armed)
- Commonwealth v. Harris, 176 A.3d 1009 (Pa. Super. 2017) (summarizes permissible officer questions and safety measures during stops)
- Commonwealth v. Chase, 960 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2008) (additional suspicion arising during a stop can justify continued detention)
- Commonwealth v. Thorne, 191 A.3d 901 (Pa. Super. 2018) (opening a car door to investigate safety concerns during a stop is permissible)
- Commonwealth v. Simonson, 148 A.3d 792 (Pa. Super. 2016) (probable cause to arrest supports search-incident-to-arrest)
- Commonwealth v. Dunham, 203 A.3d 272 (Pa. Super. 2019) (confirms authority to order driver from vehicle during a lawful traffic stop)