People v. Stanley
H043445
| Cal. Ct. App. | Dec 12, 2017Background
- On May 7, 2015 a VTA bus driver reported to dispatch that a passenger matched a May 7 BOLO flier seeking a suspect in a child sexual assault ("288 case") and pointed out Reese Stanley on a parked bus.
- Deputy Brian Tanaka, who had seen news coverage of the suspect, boarded the bus, awakened and handcuffed Stanley, removed him from the bus, and seated him on an outside bench; dispatch later confirmed Stanley was on parole.
- Other deputies arrived, conducted a parole search of Stanley, and found narcotics; 10–15 minutes later they received clear photos from the flier and determined Stanley was not the person depicted.
- Stanley was charged with possession of heroin and paraphernalia; he moved to suppress evidence from the detention/search, arguing the stop lacked reasonable suspicion.
- The trial court granted the suppression motion and dismissed the charges; the People appealed.
- The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the brief investigatory detention was supported by reasonable suspicion based on the bus driver’s identification and the contemporaneous BOLO.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether deputy had reasonable suspicion to detain Stanley for investigatory stop | BOLO plus bus driver (identified citizen) pointed out a passenger matching age, race, height, shaggy hair and beard and photos were widely disseminated, supporting a brief stop | Bus driver’s report was an unreliable secondary tip; descriptors were too vague and officer improperly delegated identification to the bus driver (citing Walker) | Stop was reasonable: citizen informant’s identification combined with the BOLO and deputy’s knowledge supported brief investigatory detention |
| Whether citizen tip is treated like anonymous tip (J.L.) | A nonanonymous citizen informant is presumptively reliable; no need for prior showing of reliability when reporting observations | Stanley argued the tip was effectively anonymous/secondary and insufficient like J.L. | Distinguished J.L.; citizen informants are more reliable and the bus driver was a "true citizen informant," so J.L. did not control |
| Whether Walker controls (requiring more specific match than race/age/weight) | People: this case differs—Stanley matched multiple specific descriptors and clear color photos were on the BOLO | Stanley: Walker requires suppression where resemblance rests mainly on race/age/weight | Walker was distinguished; here matches included height, shaggy hair, beard, and good photos, so Walker did not control |
| Scope of permissible brief detention absent probable cause | Police may perform a brief stop to confirm identity when reasonable suspicion exists; need not have probable cause to arrest | Stanley argued only probable cause would justify handcuffing and parole search consequences | Court: brief investigatory stop justified; handcuffing/removal for officer safety and status as parolee supported further search consequences (reasonable investigatory stop upheld) |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. California, 61 Cal.4th 968 (court reviews suppression rulings de novo on undisputed facts)
- Wells v. California, 38 Cal.4th 1078 (totality-of-circumstances test for investigatory detentions and risk-based justification for minimal intrusion)
- Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143 (informants’ tips can supply reasonable suspicion for investigatory stops)
- Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (anonymous tips lacking indicia of reliability are generally insufficient)
- Ramey v. California, 16 Cal.3d 263 (citizen informants are presumptively reliable when reporting observations)
- Walker v. California, 210 Cal.App.4th 1372 (detention not supported where alleged resemblance rested essentially on race, age, and weight)
- In re Tony C., 21 Cal.3d 888 (articulable facts standard for detention)