Commonwealth v. Pinto
476 Mass. 361
| Mass. | 2017Background
- Police received a radio broadcast to watch for a white Infiniti with plate beginning "FF" (complete plate later given as FF720) allegedly connected to a person wanted for domestic assault who might possess two firearms and be heading to a house on Orton Marotta Way.
- About two hours later Officers Kluziak and Fonseca encountered the identified Infiniti near Orton Marotta Way and stopped it on St. Casimir Street.
- During the stop Pinto (driver) initially placed his hands on the wheel, then moved his left hand so the officer could not see it; the officer ordered him out of the car and frisked him (no weapon found).
- The officer searched the area where Pinto had been sitting and found a firearm under the driver’s seat; Pinto was arrested and an inventory search of the vehicle produced additional evidence.
- At the suppression hearing the judge initially made findings suggesting the broadcast came from someone who came into the station, but the testimony did not support that; the judge struck those findings yet still concluded the stop was supported because the vehicle was heading toward the defendant’s mother’s house.
- The Supreme Judicial Court concluded the Commonwealth failed to establish reasonable suspicion: the radio broadcast’s basis of knowledge and veracity were not shown, and police corroboration was limited to innocuous, observable details.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle based on a radio broadcast | Broadcast was particular about vehicle and predicted direction; thus provided reasonable suspicion to stop | Broadcast lacked shown source, basis of knowledge, and reliability; no sufficient independent corroboration | No reasonable suspicion; stop unlawful, suppression denial reversed |
| Whether independent police corroboration cured deficiencies in the broadcast's reliability | Police observed the described vehicle near the predicted location, corroborating the broadcast | Observed details were innocent and observable by any bystander and did not supply the missing indicia of reliability | Corroboration of innocent details insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 461 Mass. 44 (general standard for reviewing suppression findings)
- Commonwealth v. Contos, 435 Mass. 19 (accepting judge's subsidiary factual findings absent clear error)
- Commonwealth v. Hoose, 467 Mass. 395 (independent review of constitutional application)
- Commonwealth v. Phillips, 452 Mass. 617 (reasonable suspicion required for investigatory stop)
- Commonwealth v. Gomes, 453 Mass. 506 (definition of reasonable suspicion)
- Commonwealth v. Riggieri, 438 Mass. 613 (police may rely on dispatch/broadcast for threshold inquiry)
- Commonwealth v. Lopes, 455 Mass. 147 (must show indicia of reliability and particularity for broadcast-based stops)
- Commonwealth v. Anderson, 461 Mass. 616 (when broadcast details can supply veracity)
- Commonwealth v. Upton, 394 Mass. 363 (basis of knowledge and veracity tests articulated)
- Commonwealth v. Depina, 456 Mass. 238 (less rigorous showing required for reasonable suspicion; corroboration may help)
- Commonwealth v. Lyons, 409 Mass. 16 (limited value of corroborating innocent observable details)
- Commonwealth v. Mubdi, 456 Mass. 385 (source reliability and corroboration issues)
- Commonwealth v. Fraser, 410 Mass. 541 (basis of knowledge considerations)