United States v. Hernandez-Mendez
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24364
| 4th Cir. | 2010Background
- Hernandez-Mendez was indicted for possession of a firearm by an alien and possession of a firearm in a school zone.
- District court denied suppression motions; Hernandez-Mendez proceeded to bench trial on stipulated facts for appellate review.
- MCPD gang unit surveilled near Montgomery Blair High School after a prior stabbing involving Latino gangs and potential retaliation concerns.
- Eight youths (seven males, one female) gathered across from the school; Hernandez-Mendez joined briefly, spoke with a male, then moved away but remained nearby.
- Officer Webster detained the group and, at his direction, Hernandez-Mendez sat on a curb while investigators assessed potential weapons and gang activity.
- During the stop, Webster requested identification, checked Hernandez-Mendez’s wallet and purse, and felt a heavy object resembling a firearm when touching the purse.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion | Hernandez-Mendez asserts lack of individualized suspicion. | Government argues officer’s experience and group context gave reasonable suspicion. | Yes; totality of circumstances supported reasonable suspicion. |
| Whether the frisk of the purse was constitutionally permissible | Hernandez-Mendez contends the frisk exceeded Terry limits and targeted identification only. | Government asserts objective reasonable suspicion justified a frisk for weapons and the purse was within scope. | Yes; objective facts justified a frisk for weapons, and impermissible intent did not require suppression. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Banks, 482 F.3d 733 (4th Cir.2007) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings; de novo review of law)
- United States v. Sprinkle, 106 F.3d 613 (4th Cir.1997) (totality of circumstances in reasonable suspicion analysis)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (Supreme Court, 1981) (totality-of-circumstances approach to reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (Supreme Court, 2002) (collective inferences from experience may justify suspicion)
- United States v. McCoy, 513 F.3d 405 (4th Cir.2008) (experience and patterns of local criminals support suspicion)
- United States v. Mayo, 361 F.3d 802 (4th Cir.2004) (reasonable suspicion standard; objective factors over subjective intent)
- Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (Supreme Court, 1993) (plain feel doctrine for weapons during a frisk)