Police Cannot Perform a “Terry stop” just because someone is wearing a “funny hat”

4th Amendment

A first degree murder conviction was overturned by the Fourth District Court of Appeal on August 31, 2016 due to the Court’s Fourth Amendment analysis of a bizarre description of the events.  In Lorenzo Sanchez v. State of Florida, the defendant/appellant was convicted of murder of a Pompano Beach convenience store owner.  At around 10 a.m., police issued a “be on the lookout” (BOLO) to officers based upon reports of a shooting.  The BOLO was for “two black males fleeing westbound from the store.”  For 10 minutes, according to the opinion, “police stopped every black male near the convenience store — some were on foot, others on bicycle.”  As defense counsel argued, his client was pulled over for “driving while black.”

Specifically, the defendant was travelling northbound and then eastbound (not westbound) in a car.  The driver was a black male with dreadlocks and the passenger “was seated in the rear seat furthest away from the driver.”  This passenger was wearing a white shirt and a “large hat” described as an “old granda church hat or turban/1930s flapper hat drawn down to his eyebrows.”  The officer connected the odd seating arrangement, the “funny looking hat,” the lack of eye contact, and the contents of the BOLO and pulled them over.  In a peculiar unfortunate choice of words, the trial court “noted that the officer described the scene in the case as if it were a scene from Driving Miss Daisy.”

The Fourth District noted that there must be a minimal level of objective justification for making the stop.  In BOLO cases, factors such as time, distance, rute, specificity of description, and source of information are relevant.  Here, the court found that the BOLO was “a vague BOLO with minimal connections to [the] suspect…”  However, there were insufficient further grounds for reasonable suspicion.  The “funny hat” or the seating arrangement were insufficient to support the stop.


Image credit: here

4th Amendment
Florida Police Can (1) Search Your Car After Smelling Marijuana and (2) Cut a Hole in Your Underwear to Find Drugs (Jevin Hilliard v. Florida)

Florida drivers (and those in the car) should be aware that it is fairly well-settled that police have probable cause to search a car and occupants during a traffic stop based on “the faint odor of cannabis.” But how far can the search go? We find out in Jevin Hilliard …

4th Amendment
When Can You Withdraw Consent for a DUI Blood Draw in Florida? (Florida v. Jennifer Ivie)

A Florida driver was involved in an accident, taken to the hospital, and interviewed by police who were conducting a DUI investigation. The officer spoke with the driver, advised her of her Miranda rights, conducted at least one visual test, and otherwise detected signs of intoxication. The officer asked the …

4th Amendment
Can A State Search Cellphone of Person on Probation Without Warrant or Probable Cause? (Florida v. Mark Leroy Phillips, Sr.)

Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal considered the question whether, under the Fourth Amendment, the State of Florida could search the cellphone of a man on probation for child abuse convictions (and who was a registered sex offender) when there was no warrant or reasonable suspicion. The court, in Florida …