United States v. Bernard Davis

(dissenting):

I must respectfully disagree with the majority. It appears to me that the majority reads Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), too narrowly in the light of the facts disclosed here.

In Terry , an experienced police officer observed two men standing on a downtown Cleveland street corner. From time to time he saw one or the other of them walk past a particular store and peer in as though they were “casing the joint” in preparation for a burglary or robbery. A third man came up and spoke briefly to them and walked away. The officer followed when they walked on down the street where they were joined by the third man who appeared to be one of them. At this point he stated that he believed it to be his duty as a police officer to investigate and added that he feared “they may have a gun.” Note that at this point there had been no violation of law; the officer had received no information that these men or any of them might have a gun; he had received no information or tip that they might be planning a crime and he observed nothing about their clothing to indicate a gun. To him they were simply suspicious characters. He approached them, stopped…

Davis appeals from his conviction for possession of counterfeit Federal Reserve notes, 18 U.S.C. § 472 . We agree with Davis that his motion to suppress the counterfeit money taken from his possession should have been granted, and we reverse.

The arresting officers, who were patrolling in a marked police car, stopped the ear Davis was driving after observing the following three traffic violations: (1) Davis crossed to the left of the center line and drove on the wrong side of the street, approaching the left-hand curb; (2) Davis parked briefly on the wrong side of the street; (3) leaving his parking space, Davis drove for 50 yards on the wrong side of the street before recrossing into the proper lane. Officer Saitman then, according to his testimony, “got out of the police vehicle, approached the defendant, who was driving, and asked him to alight from his vehicle, which he did. He walked over to the sidewalk, and I told him that he committed a traffic violation, that I would like to make a cursory search for weapons before I went any further. I did so. I patted him down for weapons and in the left front pants pocket I felt a large bulge. * * * ” The “large bulge” turned out to…

441 F.2d 28 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bernard DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 25221. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. April 5, 1971. Ron Bain (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant. Richard Jaeger, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Chief, Crim. Div., Tom G. Kontos, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Before DUNIWAY, ELY and TRASK, Circuit Judges. DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge: 1 Davis appeals from his conviction for possession of counterfeit Federal Reserve notes, 18 U.S.C. 472. We agree with Davis that his motion to suppress the counterfeit money taken from his possession should have been granted, and we reverse. 2 The arresting officers, who were patrolling in a marked police car, stopped the car Davis was driving after observing the following three traffic violations: (1) Davis crossed to the left of the center line and drove on the wrong side of the street, approaching the left-hand curb; (2) Davis parked briefly on the wrong side of the street; (3) leaving his parking space, Davis drove for 50 yards on the wrong side of the street before recrossing into the proper lane.…