Commonwealth v. Clemens, 66 A.3d 373

On June 27, 2009, Officer Centeno observed a hand-to-hand narcotics transaction on the 800 block of South Cecil Street in Philadelphia.
Appellant looked at the officer’s marked car, then ran to 831 South Cecil Street, went up the steps, and sat on a lawn chair pretending to read a newspaper.
Appellant did not live at 831 South Cecil Street and could not prove his identity or residence.
When Appellant stood for a pat-down, a clear bag containing 31 packets of crack cocaine fell from his pants onto the porch.
Following the arrest, a search incident to arrest revealed $328 in cash in Appellant’s pockets, and Judges denied the suppression motion, leading to Appellant’s conviction for possession and PWID.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was reasonable suspicion for an investigatory detention	Clemens contends no suspicion; no observed exchange.	Centeno relied on experience and totality of circumstances indicating a narcotics transaction.	Yes, reasonable suspicion supported detention.
Whether the frisk was justified or legally commenced	Clemens argues the frisk was not justified since no weapon was observed.	The Court held the frisk did not actually begin as a standalone act; seizure valid and frisk not triggered.	Frisk not commenced as a separate frisk; seizure justified; conviction affirmed.

Commonwealth v. Eichinger, 591 Pa. 1, 915 A.2d 1122 (2007) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings; uncontradicted evidence governs)
Commonwealth v. Holmes, 609 Pa. 1, 14 A.3d 89 (2011) (totality of circumstances in reasonable suspicion analysis)
Commonwealth v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (nervous, evasive behavior relevant to suspicion)
Commonwealth v. Revere, 585 Pa. 262, 888 A.2d 694 (2005) (limits on detention and movement for safety in stops)
Commonwealth v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) (vehicle-stop safety and order to exit)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (stop and frisk framework and safety justification)