Summary
The Supreme Court of New Jersey considered whether police lawfully seized a plastic bag from a bulge in the defendant's pants during a traffic stop and investigatory detention. The court held that the officers' conduct was justified under Terry v. Ohio because the totality of the circumstances created an objectively reasonable concern that the defendant was armed and dangerous, and it reversed and remanded for trial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the officers' warrantless seizure of the contents of the bulge in defendant's pants exceeded the scope of a valid protective search under Terry v. Ohio.
- Whether the totality of the circumstances provided an objectively reasonable basis to believe that defendant was armed and dangerous and therefore justified removal of the unidentified object after the initial pat-down did not reveal a weapon.
Holdings
- When the totality of the circumstances creates an objectively reasonable concern that a suspect is armed and dangerous, officers may retrieve the contents of an unidentified bulge from the suspect's person even if an initial pat-down does not identify the object as a weapon.
Key quotations
“Where, as here, the totality of the circumstances creates an objectively reasonable concern for the officers' safety, retrieving the contents of the bulge from defendant's person is allowable.” (172 N.J. at 25)
“That is not to suggest that every time an officer pats down a defendant and cannot ascertain what he is feeling, he is free to seize the item.” (172 N.J. at 25)
Factual background
At approximately 12:26 a.m., a police officer stopped defendant after observing an extremely dim headlight and a rejected inspection sticker. Defendant was nervous, appeared intoxicated, attempted twice to leave the vehicle, lacked his driver's license, and repeatedly reached toward a baseball-sized bulge in his groin area despite police commands to raise his hands. After officers restrained his hands, one officer patted the bulge and removed a protruding plastic bag, which contained cocaine and heroin.
Procedural history
The trial court upheld the traffic stop and protective seizure of the plastic bag from defendant's waistband. The Appellate Division agreed that the stop and initial pat-down were lawful but held that the officers exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop by removing the bag after the pat-down did not identify a weapon. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for trial.
Remand instructions
The judgment of the Appellate Division was reversed, and the matter was remanded for trial.