Durazo

People v. Durazo

Good Law
124 Cal. App. 4th 728·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 2031·2004 Daily Journal DAR 14365·21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 516·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10612
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 2, 2004B173901California3,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perren, J.

Few statements in the law are as often repeated: “[A]n investigative stop or detention predicated on mere curiosity, rumor, or hunch is unlawful, even though the officer may be acting in complete good faith.” In re Tony C. (1978) 21 Cal.3d 888, 893 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 366 , 582 P.2d 957 ].) (The Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures dictates that traffic stops must be supported by articulable facts giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the driver or a passenger has violated the Vehicle Code or some other law. (People v. Miranda (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 917, 926 [ 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 785 ].) In this case, the police officer who conducted the traffic stop did so on a mere hunch that the defendant and his passenger were involved in criminal activity. In other words, the facts known to the officer were insufficient to support the objectively reasonable suspicion necessary to justify a detention under the Fourth Amendment.

The genesis of the stop was a college student’s report to the police that unknown “Mexican gang members” had called him several times threatening to come to his apartment about 6:00 a.m. the following morning. When the police…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.