Soukaneh v. Andrzejewski
112 F.4th 107
2d Cir.2024Background
- Plaintiff Basel Soukaneh was stopped by Officer Nicholas Andrzejewski in Waterbury, Connecticut, after pulling over to fix his GPS in a high-crime area.
- During the stop, Soukaneh voluntarily presented a facially valid firearms permit and disclosed he lawfully possessed a pistol in the car.
- Andrzejewski forcibly removed Soukaneh from his car, handcuffed him, and detained him in the back of his cruiser for over half an hour.
- Andrzejewski conducted warrantless searches of Soukaneh’s vehicle and trunk, despite no evidence of suspicious or unlawful behavior, and confirmed the firearm permit's validity during the process.
- Soukaneh filed suit alleging violations of his Fourth Amendment rights; the district court denied summary judgment on qualified immunity for the detention and searches, which Andrzejewski appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Detention constituted arrest, not a Terry stop | No probable cause to arrest merely for possessing a licensed gun and being compliant | The presence of a firearm justified handcuffed detention until permit validity confirmed | Prolonged, forcible detention was a de facto arrest lacking probable cause and violated the Fourth Amendment |
| Warrantless search of vehicle (Terry frisk) | No reasonable suspicion or danger—lawful gun with valid permit, no suspicious behavior | Lawful Terry frisk based on weapon's presence and officer safety concerns | No reasonable apprehension of danger; Terry frisk unjustified on these facts |
| Warrantless search of trunk (automobile exception) | Lawful gun is not contraband; no probable cause to search trunk | Discovery of gun justified additional probable cause to search trunk for contraband | Possession of lawful gun does not create probable cause for trunk search; search violated Fourth Amendment |
| Qualified Immunity | Rights were clearly established, so no immunity | No specific precedent for these facts; reasonable officer might believe actions were legal | Clearly established that prolonged detention and searches were unlawful in these circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (authorized limited investigatory stops based on reasonable suspicion, not arrest-level detention)
- Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (Terry vehicle frisk requires specific, articulable suspicion of danger)
- Knowles v. Iowa, 525 U.S. 113 (traffic stop plus general officer safety concern does not justify full vehicle search)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (probable cause is a totality-of-the-circumstances determination)
- Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (random stops/searches must be reasonable under Fourth Amendment)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (scope of automobile exception search is limited by probable cause about specific evidence/crime)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (stops must not be prolonged beyond mission of original purpose without new reasonable suspicion)