• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Top court: Police pat-downs can't be based on odd behavior

Right Wing Wacko

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
645
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
imported post

http://www.komotv.com/news/local/19178964.html


By Associated Press
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - In another nod to the Washington Constitution's broad privacy protections, the state Supreme Court has thrown out the drug conviction of a man who was searched by police solely because of his weird behavior.

Thursday's unanimous decision reinforces the rules for simple pat-downs under state law, which offers stronger safeguards against police searches than the U.S. Constitution.

Without a search warrant or probable cause to make an arrest, police in Washington may frisk someone for weapons only if an officer has reason to believe the person is armed and dangerous.

The court said those rules weren't followed in the case of Michael D. Setterstrom, who was arrested in 2005 after police got a call about two men behaving oddly at a Department of Social and Health Services office in Tumwater.

When two officers showed up at the office, Setterstrom was sitting on a bench, filling out an application for public assistance. He was sitting next to another man, who was asleep.

Setterstrom, described as increasingly nervous and fidgety, gave two different names to the officers when questioned. Setterstrom also blurted out the second name when police woke his companion to ask about Setterstrom's true identity.

Believing Setterstrom was high on methamphetamine, Lt. Don Stevens frisked him for possible weapons.

Although Setterstrom didn't stand up, put his hands in his pockets or do anything threatening, Stevens said he feared danger because his experience was that meth users may become violent without warning.

The pat-down uncovered a small plastic baggie of white powder in Setterstrom's pocket. Stevens put the baggie on the bench and told Setterstrom he was under arrest.

"What happened next was, we assume, unusual," the court said: Setterstrom fell to his knees, grabbed the baggie and swallowed it. "For obvious reasons, police never recovered the baggie," Justice James Johnson wrote for the court.

Police also found a small, locked safe in Setterstrom's backpack. After getting a search warrant, police opened the safe and found another baggie of meth, along with a needle, a pipe, and a scale. Setterstrom was convicted of drug possession and sentenced to six months in jail.

He appealed, claiming the search was illegal. The Supreme Court agreed.

To frisk someone without a warrant or probable cause for an arrest, police must have "a reasonable belief, based on objective facts, that the suspect is armed and presently dangerous."

The court said that justification didn't exist in Setterstrom's case. In fact, justices said, the record shows only that Setterstrom may have been high - and that isn't a crime.

Furthermore, police didn't find Setterstrom "in a dark alley in a crime-ridden area," the court said. Rather, he was lawfully in the public area of a social services office, filling out a form for government benefits.

"It seems likely that some people filling out benefits forms exhibit erratic behavior, making employment difficult and benefits applicable," the court said.

Since the search warrant for the safe in Setterstrom's backpack was based on the illegal pat-down, his conviction for the drugs within must be overturned, the court ruled.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

On another forum where I play we can 'ping' an article to a user's attention.

((((Ping)))) LEO 229, how about this State Supreme Court's decision?

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMA$$
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

underthebridge wrote:
I added the pdf of the opinion to NWCDL. This seems like the most stable place to store opinions. They tend to become harder to find after 90 days.
That and it is not going anywhere anytime soon.

Thanks for using it for what we intended.
 

Gene Beasley

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
426
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
imported post

Perhaps it's worth a thread of its own. NWCDL has some awesome capabilities. I don't want to detract from OCDO at all, this has very much become home to me. It's cool, we've got all ages, people visiting from out of town, sages who have traveled down the same path we might ourselves be embarking on, crazy uncles - it's just like family (we're just missing the hawt cousins :dude:).

But it has some limitations that are really frustrating. You can't sticky, the editor hates Firefox, or at least my combination of extensions. I read in Firefox because it lets me control text size better than IE, but if posting, I have to switch to IE.

If you're serious about getting into the dirt on activism, there needs to be a place you can go where you're closer to the admin (nothing against John, he's done a great job building this site, if not this movement). NWCDL is well laid out, has some really cool features. I think that any member living in WA, OR, IDshould be a member on NWCDL.
 
Top