Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Motion to Suppress – 4th amendment

By: Derek Hawkins//April 18, 2016//

Motion to Suppress – 4th amendment

By: Derek Hawkins//April 18, 2016//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Berton Mays

Case No.: 15-2152

Officials: FLAUM and RIPPLE, Circuit Judges, and PETERSON, District Judge

Focus: Motion to Suppress – 4th amendment

Motion to suppress statements made to federal agents while in pre-trial confinement denied as there were no 6th amendment violations of right to counsel. Also, officer’s stop supported by reasonable suspicion.

“First, although the Government concedes that Officer Lepsky did not have reasonable suspicion to believe that Mr. Mays actually was involved in the fight, he knew that Mr. Mays had left the scene upon the arrival of Officer Coffing, a factor that we have held can be “suggestive of wrongdoing and can be…considered in a court’s determination of …reasonable suspicion.” United States v. Carlisle, 614 F.3d 750, 756 (7th Cir. 2010); see Wardlow, 528 U.S. at 124 (holding that “unprovoked flight upon noticing the police” is pertinent to the reasonable suspicion analysis); Lawshea, 461 F.3d at 860 (refusing to draw a constitutional distinction between running from the police and walking away evasively); United States v. Valentine, 232 F.3d 350, 357 (3d Cir. 2000) (“In evaluating the totality of the circumstances, we must also take into account that Valentine and the two men with him immediately began walking away from the patrol car when it arrived. Walking away from the police hardly amounts to the headlong flight considered in Wardlow and of course would not give rise to reasonable suspicion by itself, even in a high-crime area, but it is a factor that can be considered in the totality of the circumstances.”). Officer Lepsky also knew that the fight had taken place in a high-crime area. Although this fact alone “cannot, in and of itself, support a particularized suspicion…an officer is permitted to consider a location’s characteristics when assessing a situation.” United States v. Oglesby, 597 F.3d 891, 894 (7th Cir. 2010).”

Affirmed

Full Text


Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests