well you gotta hand it to the kid's attorney.
It was a creative way to make his defense.
"I had no idea i was under arrest!"
all i can see for the future is little yellow circles and a loud speaker stating
"THIS IS A POLICE CONTROL PLACE YOUR HANDS INSIDE THE YELLOW CIRCLES THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION"
Ala the "5th Element"
Because,
Thus, under applicable case law, G.M. was not seized for Fourth Amendment purposes until he became aware of and submitted to the assertion or display of police authority. The facts of this case support the conclusion that G.M. did not observe the activated lights when the officers arrived, and he became aware of the police presence only when Officer Smith actually appeared at the window of the Lexus. Thus, like the defendant in Houston, G.M. was seized only as Officer Smith identified himself, ordered G.M. to spit out the marijuana, and G.M. complied. Officer Smith had already witnessed G.M. in possession of marijuana at the time he issued the order, and probable cause existed for an arrest. Therefore, we conclude that the seizure of G.M. did not violate the restrictions of the Fourth Amendment, and the trial court correctly denied G.M.‟s motion to suppress.
so your little story at the top of the article Ichiro is kinda bogus if you had actually gotten all the way through the decision you would have realized that the kid DID see the cops, DID know he was pinched.
G.M. was seized only as Officer Smith identified himself, ordered G.M. to spit out the marijuana, and G.M. complied
#2 | POSTED BY ANDYUHENET AT 2009-10-13 10:17 PM | REPLY | FLAG
andy, please enlighten me.
What is it exactly that you can not do that you could in 1989?
i would genuinely like to know.
Seeing as i lived through all of that.
Which of my civil liberties are missing?
Be specific.
