The dissent noted the officers dealing with Chestnut were entitled to rely on the first officer’s characterization of Chestnut as a suspicious person.
#REASONABLE SUSPICION KEVIN GATES DOWNLOAD FULL#
The court stated Chestnut’s initial refusal to provide his full Social Security number could not be weighed as supporting reasonable suspicion. The majority held Chestnut had committed no crime, was calm and cooperative, and there was no reason to believe he could be armed and dangerous. On the other hand, one officer reported Chestnut was hiding in the tree line. For example, in deciding the question of qualified immunity, the court had to accept Chestnut’s story that he intentionally placed himself in the officer’s headlights. Several factors might suggest why the court was divided. The court held the facts as alleged provided a basis for a reasonable jury to conclude the officers unlawfully detained and handcuffed Chestnut. City of Philadelphia, 862 F.3d 353 (3rd Cir. Any person has the right to observe, and even record, police activity in a public place (see Hoyland v.A person may be frisked for weapons upon reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous (see Terry v.
A substantial chance or fair probability of criminal activity can establish probable cause. A person may be arrested upon probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and the person committed it.Reasonable suspicion is based on commonsense judgments about human behavior (see Illinois v. A person may be detained for a brief investigation upon reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.One judge dissented.Ī few black letter legal principles and bright-line rules to remember before discussing what happened in Chestnut’s case: Chestnut later sued, alleging he was detained, arrested, frisked, and handcuffed without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. The sergeant directed the handcuffs be removed and Chestnut released. Chestnut gave his Social Security number to the sergeant. A sergeant arrived and conversed briefly with Chestnut. The officer frisked Chestnut and directed another officer to handcuff Chestnut.Ĭhestnut asked to speak with a supervisor. Chestnut gave his name and date of birth, but only recited the last four digits of his Social Security number. The officer then asked for Chestnut’s full name and Social Security number. The officer asked Chestnut for identification and Chestnut replied he had none. Seeing Chestnut, the second officer illuminated him with a spotlight and approached to question him. The officer radioed for assistance in checking on a “suspicious man” watching “all the traffic stops.” Another officer arrived. He stopped again when he saw the officer make another traffic stop. After the officer concluded the stop, Chestnut resumed jogging. Both Chestnut and the officer were aware of tensions between community members and the police, and that the area had been the site of some “testy exchanges” between police and citizens. Chestnut stopped to watch the officer conduct the stop.
Louis, Missouri, when he saw an officer make a traffic stop. Kevin Chestnut was jogging through a park in St.
0 kommentar(er)
