State v. Mohr
2013 S.D. 94
S.D.2013Background
- Mohr, detained outside a casino after a panic button alert due to a prior armed-robbery pattern, was identified as a suspect by officers.
- Griffith, an employee, alerted police and identified Mohr after viewing a poster of a prior robbery.
- Officers relied on the collective knowledge doctrine, combining information from Griffith with prior robberies in the area.
- Officers conducted a brief outside stop and asked for ID, then performed a pat-down after Mohr appeared potentially armed.
- Search of Mohr yielded methamphetamine, a pipe, and paraphernalia, leading to charges for possession, paraphernalia, and obstructing an officer.
- Mohr moved to suppress the evidence as a Fourth Amendment violation; the trial court denied the motion and Mohr was convicted on all counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop and frisk violated the Fourth Amendment. | Mohr: no reasonable suspicion. | Mohr: totality supported reasonable suspicion. | No; reasonable suspicion supported the stop and frisk. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sound Sleeper, 787 N.W.2d 787 (2010 S.D. 71) (reasonable suspicion standard; totality of circumstances)
- State v. Quartier, 753 N.W.2d 885 (2008 S.D. 62) (totality of the circumstances)
- State v. Haar, 772 N.W.2d 157 (2009 S.D. 79) (hunches not enough; corroboration via totality)
- State v. Satter, 766 N.W.2d 153 (2009 S.D. 35) (informant reliability and totality of facts)
- State v. DeLaRosa, 657 N.W.2d 683 (2003 S.D. 18) (reasonable suspicion sufficient for investigative stop)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (defining reasonable suspicion; not easily precise)
- State v. Bonacker, 825 N.W.2d 916 (2013 S.D. 3) (review of suppression ruling; de novo standard)