terminal.logic
Regular Member
imported post
Reasonable suspicion, not probable cause, is the basis of a temporary detainment.
Reasonable suspicion, not probable cause, is the basis of a temporary detainment.
Agreed.Merely wearing a holstered sidearm is not probable cause.
It is not controlling. Lawyers have posted here saying that it is persuasive and may be cited. Applicability is not applicable.St. John v. McColley is not applicable case law in Alabama, although its reasoning is sound.
It is not unreasonable to demand a lawfully detained subject to step out of the store.
"Do you mind if..." is one of those ambiguous questions. If someone says yes, do they mean, "Yes, you may look," or, "Yes, I mind."And if they ever say, "mind if I look in your car?" remember: Yes! You do mind very much.
Let's say someone called and said that there was a man waving a gun around and scaring folks. Once the officer arrives on the scene and sees a man with a properly holstered sidearm sipping coffee and no one freaking out, he would still have no RAS to think that LAC was committing a crime.Similar to the McColley case, if the officer received a report of "man with a holstered sidearm sipping coffee" and he responded and observed same, no R.S. would exist.
However some people are much more creative as they describe things to the police.
Yeah, the caller could lie. And, when lying calls come in, honest LACs can get rousted without recourse.But the call could have come in as....dude pointed a gun at me in the parking lot, last seen entering the store...In which case RS would exist...
The whole issue in McColley is the officer plainly testified he had no RS to detain...