United States v. Izeal Rideau, Jr.

Summary

The Fifth Circuit held that police officers were justified in briefly detaining Izeal Rideau, Jr. to check on his condition but lacked specific, individualized facts supporting a protective patdown under Terry v. Ohio. Because the firearm was discovered during the improper patdown and was the sole evidence supporting his conviction, the court reversed; the court later ordered rehearing en banc.

Holdings

1. The officers were justified in briefly detaining Rideau to check on his condition because his presence in the roadway and possible intoxication presented a hazard to himself and others, even though the detention was not based on suspected criminal activity.
2. The protective patdown violated the Fourth Amendment because the officers lacked specific and articulable facts supporting an individualized inference that Rideau was armed and dangerous. A high-crime area, late hour, prior experience with weapons in the area, and generalized nervousness were insufficient.
3. The firearm should have been suppressed, and the conviction was reversed for insufficient evidence because the firearm was the sole evidence admitted against Rideau.

Questions Presented

1. Whether officers could briefly detain Rideau to check on his condition even without specific suspicion of criminal activity.
2. Whether the officers had specific and articulable facts supporting an individualized reasonable inference that Rideau was armed and dangerous, thereby justifying a protective patdown under Terry v. Ohio.
3. Whether the firearm should have been suppressed and whether reversal was required when the firearm was the sole evidence supporting the conviction.

Disposition

reversed