State v. Sizer, 149 A.3d 706

Background

Appellee Jamal Sizer was indicted for unlawful possession of a firearm related to drug trafficking after police on bike patrol approached a group in a poorly lit, "high-crime" area; Sizer fled when officers announced themselves.
Officers pursued, tackled, and began handcuffing Sizer; he yelled he had a pistol and the supervisor, Corporal Zammillo, who arrived seconds later, recognized Sizer and learned of outstanding arrest warrants for him.
After the arrest on the warrant, officers opened Sizer’s backpack and found a loaded .38 revolver; later, a baggie with 27 pills was found in his sock at a police satellite office.
Sizer filed a pretrial motion to suppress; the suppression court granted it, concluding police did not follow required rules despite finding officers credible and likely correct about suspicious facts.
The State appealed; the Court of Special Appeals reviewed the suppression ruling de novo as to legal questions but accepted the suppression-hearing factfindings.
The appellate court reversed suppression, holding (1) unprovoked flight in a high-crime area supplied reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop and frisk; (2) discovery of an existing arrest warrant supplied an independent/superseding basis for arrest and a search incident to arrest.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether unprovoked flight in a high‑crime area justified an investigatory stop (Terry)	Flight alone is not illegal; the stop was unreasonable because flight by itself is insufficient	Flight in a high‑crime area is suspicious; combined with other factors it gives reasonable suspicion	Court: Unprovoked flight in a high‑crime area supplied reasonable articulable suspicion for a Terry stop (Illinois v. Wardlow controlling)
Whether officers could perform a frisk/search for weapons	Frisk/search required per se illegality of weapon possession or knowledge of lack of permit	Frisk justified by officer safety concerns because suspect was seen fleeing and admitted he had a pistol	Court: Frisk reasonable because officer safety, admission, and backpack within reach justified a weapons frisk (Terry/Michigan v. Long)
Whether evidence found in backpack and sock must be suppressed as "fruit of the poisonous tree"	But‑for the stop, arrest and search would not have occurred then; evidence is derivative and must be excluded	A preexisting arrest warrant provided an independent, superseding basis for arrest and lawful search incident to arrest	Court: Evidence admissible; arrest warrant was an independent/superseding source for the search incident (Independent source/inevitable discovery/attenuation doctrines)
Whether the chase or physical takedown constituted an unconstitutional seizure or excessive force	The takedown converted an investigatory stop into an arrest or was excessive, rendering subsequent search unreasonable	Chase alone is not a seizure (Hodari D.); takedown was reasonable given flight and threat—force permitted to effect detention	Court: Chase was not a Fourth Amendment seizure; the takedown and handcuffing were reasonable and did not render the search unlawful

Key Cases Cited

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes investigatory stop and limited frisk standard)
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (unprovoked flight in high‑crime area can create reasonable suspicion)
Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (extends reach rule for searches of areas within suspect's immediate control)
Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (search incident to lawful arrest scope)
California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (flight and chase are not a seizure until physical control or submission)
Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796 (independent source doctrine permits admission when later lawful means produced evidence)
Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533 (explicates independent source doctrine)
Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (inevitable discovery doctrine)
Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (limits on "fruit of the poisonous tree" and rejects per se but‑for exclusion)
Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (but‑for causation alone is insufficient to require exclusion)
Myers v. State, 395 Md. 261 (preexisting warrant can create an independent basis to arrest and search)
Williams v. State, 372 Md. 386 (independent source doctrine recognized under Maryland law)