United States v. Chandan Prentiss Hurd
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7612
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- In the early hours of March 23, 2013, two Minneapolis officers observed a car stopped in the middle of a dark, sparsely lit street in a high-crime area; Hurd stood outside by the driver’s-side window.
- Officer Martin thought the situation looked like a hand-to-hand narcotics transaction given location, time, cold weather, and absence of nearby buildings.
- Officers turned around, stopped behind the car, and ordered Hurd to remove his hands from his jacket pockets; Hurd repeatedly kept his hands in his pockets and walked toward the officers despite orders.
- Officers grabbed Hurd, placed him on the squad car hood, and Officer Martin reached into Hurd’s pocket and felt the butt of a handgun; they recovered a loaded, cocked .45 caliber pistol and arrested Hurd.
- Hurd moved to suppress the firearm, arguing the stop lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion and the frisk lacked reasonable belief he was armed and dangerous; the magistrate and district court denied suppression and Hurd pleaded guilty.
- The court of appeals affirmed, holding the stop and protective frisk were supported by the totality of the circumstances and officer experience.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of the stop (Terry) | Hurd: officers had only a generalized hunch; being in a high-crime area and standing by a car is insufficient | Government: combination of location, time, car parked in middle of road, Hurd standing at driver’s window, cold, darkness, and officer experience gave reasonable suspicion | Stop was lawful under the totality of the circumstances |
| Lawfulness of the frisk (protective pat-down) | Hurd: officers lacked a reasonable belief he was armed and dangerous; frisk was pretextual | Government: Hurd’s refusal to remove hands from pockets and approach officers gave rise to officer safety concerns | Frisk was reasonable; officers could perform protective pat-down |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (framework for investigatory stops and frisks)
- United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (reasonable-suspicion standard for Terry stops)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (officer safety considerations during traffic stops)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (totality-of-the-circumstances and officer experience in assessing reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Cornelius, 391 F.3d 965 (8th Cir. 2004) (high-crime area and hands-in-pockets support reasonable suspicion and frisk)
- United States v. Knox, 950 F.2d 516 (8th Cir. 1991) (factors supporting Terry stop in narcotics area)
- United States v. Clutter, 674 F.3d 980 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- United States v. Garcia, 23 F.3d 1331 (8th Cir. 1994) (reasonable suspicion requires particularized facts)
- United States v. Wright, 739 F.3d 1160 (8th Cir. 2014) (deference to district court credibility findings)