State v. Larson, 3014-II
| Decision Date | 12 October 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 3014-II,3014-II |
| Citation | 21 Wn.App. 506,587 P.2d 171 |
| Parties | The STATE of Washington, Appellant, v. Louanne Marie LARSON, Respondent. |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
Joseph D. Mladinov, Senior Deputy Prosecutor, Tacoma, for appellant.
Lawrence W. Moore, Tacoma, for respondent.
Defendant was arrested for possession of marijuana. At an omnibus hearing, the trial court ordered suppression of the evidence and dismissed the charge on the ground that police had no legal justification for stopping defendant or requesting her to produce identification. The State appeals pursuant to RAP 2.2(b)(2). 1 We reverse and remand the case to the superior court.
The only issue in the case is whether the undisputed facts justified an investigatory detention. 2 The record showed that on Wednesday, March 2, 1977, a Tacoma police cruiser spotted a Volkswagen parked on South G Street, next to Wright Park, at 3:10 a. m. The vehicle was parked over one foot from the curb in a no-parking zone. The park was closed at that time, and police said the vehicle "was not really parked any place which would make it logical to be visiting one of the residents in that area." Police also stated that they regularly patrolled that area because of frequent burglaries, and it was unusual to see a car parked in that location at that time in the morning. As they pulled up behind the car, the driver started it up and tried to drive away. Police flashed their emergency lights and stopped the car.
The car was occupied by 3 persons, 2 males and 1 female. One of the males was driving. Police asked each person for identification and explanation for his presence in the area. As the defendant opened her purse to get her identification, police shone their flashlights at her and saw a plastic baggie containing marijuana in the purse. Defendant was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance. Subsequently, she requested a suppression hearing. She testified that police had made insulting remarks to her during her arrest, calling her a prostitute and a drug pusher. However, she did not contradict any of the police testimony regarding the circumstances leading up to the investigatory detention. Nevertheless, the trial court suppressed the evidence on the ground that the police "didn't have a proper legal foundation to ask for identification before they inquired further of her."
Our Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that citizens may be briefly detained as part of a police investigation under circumstances not otherwise justifying arrest. State v. Byers, 85 Wash.2d 783, 539 P.2d 833 (1975), Rev'd on other grounds, 88 Wash.2d 1, 559 P.2d 1334 (1977).
(W)here officers entertain a well-founded suspicion not amounting to probable cause, they may stop the suspected person, identify themselves and require the suspect to identify himself and explain his activity . . .
State v. Gluck, 83 Wash.2d 424, 426, 518 P.2d 703, 705 (1974); See Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143, 145-46, 92 S.Ct. 1921, 1923, 32 L.Ed.2d 612, 616-17 (1972).
The test of the validity of such brief detention is whether from the totality of the circumstances it appears that the detention was based upon reasonable grounds and was not arbitrary or harassing.
State v. Byers, supra, at 787, 539 P.2d at 836. The State has the burden of showing the detention was reasonable. State v. Davis, 12 Wash.App. 32, 527 P.2d 1131 (1974).
While the presence of individuals wandering abroad late at night or at an unusual hour should not of itself precipitate a police investigation, it is a circumstance justifying suspicion. See, e. g., Seattle v. Drew, 70 Wash.2d 405, 423 P.2d 522 (1967); State v. Baxter, 68 Wash.2d 416, 413 P.2d 638 (1966). Taking it in combination with factors such as the defendant's being seated in a car parked in a no-parking zone near a closed park in an area where numerous burglaries had occurred previously, police suspicion of illegal conduct was justifiable. Under such circumstances, the police may ask for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rankin
...that the police officers did not have any legal justification for "requesting" identification from the passenger. State v. Larson, 21 Wash.App. 506, 507, 587 P.2d 171 (1978). The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, determining that "the police may ask for identification fr......
-
State v. Larson
...or to require her to produce her identification. The State appealed, and the Court of Appeals unanimously reversed. State v. Larson, 21 Wash.App. 506, 587 P.2d 171 (1978). The State contends that the automobile stop was proper for two reasons: (1) because it was parked illegally late at nig......
-
State v. Stroud
... ... Texas, supra, and as adopted by our State Supreme Court in State v. Larson, 93 Wash.2d 638, 611 P.2d 771 (1980) (suppressed contraband discovered on passenger in car parked late at night next to closed park in high crime ... ...
-
State v. Sykes
...This procedure complies with the standards enunciated in State v. Larson, 93 Wash.2d 638, 611 P.2d 771 (1980), rev'g State v. Larson, 21 Wash.App. 506, 587 P.2d 171 (1978). Thus, the investigative stop was lawful, the admission of the fact of possession was voluntary, and the consent to sea......