The officer was compelled to search the person due to the suspicion that he was in possession of an illegal firearm. The shoving-down motion was might have been interpreted as trying to hide a gun. When a police officer identifies suspicious activities, he or she is allowed to frisk and assess if there is anything such as illegal weapons that can pose a threat (Terry v. Ohio, 1968). The officer, must, however, provide probable cause for any of the searches as they are unwarranted. Although the act of searching the passenger was genuine, it did not constitute probable cause. In State v. Braxton, the court ruled that movements suspicious should not warrant search unless the officer has specific knowledge of a particular crime linked to the motion. In the case, Braxton, the defendant, was overspending and didn’t respond to the police’s blue light. When stopped, the defendant was seen to be putting something under the car seat. The police, after a search, found the product to be marijuana but the court found the act as not constituting probable cause. Similarly, in this particular instance, the act of shoving down was not sufficient to warrant a search.
In this case, the police might be having probable cause to search the car. The bullets clearly visible to the car might be material in a criminal activity pursuant to the search. The police officers are allowed to search if there is a possible first-hand evidence of crime or materials that could have led up to a crime. Previous incidences in the area might have also warranted the search, but the officer should have checked for possible cases of intoxication or soberness first. The evidence found is therefore admissible.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889 (1968)
State v. Braxton, 90 N.C. App. 204, 207, 368 S.E.2d 56, 58 (1988)
