United States v. Kareen Rasul Griffin
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20543
| 11th Cir. | 2012Background
- Officer Edwards responded to an unverified 911 call at Rainbow Kids in a high-crime strip mall.
- Griffin, identified as the potential suspect, fled and was stopped after a brief approach and frisk.
- During the frisk, Edwards felt what he believed were C-cell batteries in Griffin’s pocket and asked Griffin what was in the pocket.
- Griffin replied the items were shotgun shells; Edwards then asked about Griffin’s prison history, after which Griffin began to flee and was arrested.
- The district court suppressed Griffin’s statements and shotgun shells as fruits of an unlawful search, holding the questions unrelated to the stop violated Terry’s scope.
- The Eleventh Circuit reversed, holding unrelated questions during a valid Terry stop do not convert a stop into an unlawful seizure and do not constitute an unlawful search, and remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop and frisk were constitutionally reasonable | Griffin argued the frisk and questions violated Fourth Amendment limits | Edwards acted within Terry to ensure safety; stop and frisk were justified | Stop and frisk permissible; safety-based frisk upheld |
| Whether unrelated questioning prolonged the stop | Questions about pocket items and prison history extended the stop unconstitutionally | Unrelated questions do not measurably extend the stop if brief | Unrelated questions did not measurably extend the stop; duration not unreasonably prolonged |
| Whether the questions were a search under the Fourth Amendment | Questions invaded Griffin’s privacy during the frisk | Questions were not a search; they did not seize or compel disclosure | Questions were not a Fourth Amendment search |
| Whether Dickerson governs the propriety of Griffin’s questioning | Dickerson prohibits such questioning during a Terry stop | Dickerson does not bar brief, non-coercive questioning during a valid stop | Dickerson not violated; questioning permitted consistent with Terry and Johnson/Mena framework |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (reasonable suspicion required for stop)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (stop and frisk for weapons with reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Street, 472 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2006) (scope and duration of stop must be reasonable)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (totality of the circumstances test)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (flight and evasive behavior support reasonable suspicion)
- White v. United States, 593 F.3d 1199 (11th Cir. 2010) (frisk permissible to protect safety when danger is suspected)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (unrelated questioning does not convert stop to seizure if duration not extended)
- United States v. Digiovanni, 650 F.3d 498 (4th Cir. 2011) (unrelated questions during stop do not violate Terry’s scope if not prolonging stop)
- United States v. Everett, 601 F.3d 484 (6th Cir. 2010) (unrelated questions during stop did not trigger Fourth Amendment violation)
- United States v. Ramirez, 476 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir. 2007) (detention duration focus when considering unrelated questioning)
- Mena v. United States, 544 U.S. 93 (2005) (mere questioning does not constitute seizure if not prolonging detention)
- Arizona v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93 (2005) (see above)