United States v. Kenneth Key, 621 F. App'x 321

On Aug. 18, 2013, Officer Stachowicz observed Kenneth Key and two others walking in the street at night in Youngstown, violating a city ordinance requiring use of the sidewalk.
Officer smelled marijuana and noted Key and another man wore heavy winter coats on a hot summer night; officer suspected they might be concealing weapons.
Officer announced he would run an ID check and perform a pat-down. Key initially consented: “I have nothing on me and you can check me. I am good.”
As officers prepared to frisk, Key whispered to a companion and then attempted to walk away with hands at his waistband; officers ordered him back, he failed to comply, and was pushed against a cruiser.
Key admitted he had a gun; officers handcuffed him and recovered a loaded handgun from his jacket. He was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm and moved to suppress the gun.
District court denied the suppression motion; Key entered a conditional guilty plea reserving appeal of the denial. The Sixth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the pat-down frisk that revealed a handgun was lawful	Key: frisk was unjustified because at the time officers announced the frisk there were no furtive movements or other facts establishing reasonable suspicion	Government: frisk was justified by Key’s consent, later evasive movement and failure to comply, his admission he had a gun, recent local crimes, and unseasonable heavy clothing suggesting concealment	Court: Affirmed; cumulative facts (consent, evasive conduct, noncompliance, admission, crime pattern, clothing) gave reasonable suspicion to frisk

Bennett v. City of Eastpointe, 410 F.3d 810 (6th Cir. 2005) (violation of law can supply reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop)
United States v. Wellman, 185 F.3d 651 (6th Cir. 1999) (when reviewing denials of suppression courts view evidence in government’s favor)
United States v. Jeter, 721 F.3d 746 (6th Cir. 2013) (failure to respond and flight can supply reasonable suspicion for frisk)
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (officer may frisk a detainee when reasonably suspecting the person is armed and dangerous)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (officer may conduct a limited pat-down when reasonably warranted for safety)
United States v. Carter, 378 F.3d 584 (6th Cir. 2004) (consent can waive Fourth Amendment protections against searches)
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (nervous, evasive behavior is a relevant factor for reasonable suspicion)