From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Tate

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Jan 14, 2020
286 So. 3d 1037 (La. 2020)

Opinion

No. 2019-KK-1618

01-14-2020

STATE of Louisiana v. Michael TATE


PER CURIAM

Writ granted. A trial court is afforded vast discretion in ruling on evidentiary matters, and such rulings should not be disturbed absent manifest error or unless the ruling is clearly wrong. The facts show that the defendant was observed talking with an individual who was rolling what was thought to be a "blunt," or marijuana cigar. As the officers approached, the defendant grabbed and held the waistband of his pants and started to walk away. When the officers ordered the defendant to stop, he ignored them. The defendant's location, his proximity to an individual suspected to be engaged in criminal activity, and his actions in grabbing his waistband and failing to heed the officers' orders, gave the officers reasonable suspicion to investigate further and conduct a pat-down for officer safety, pursuant to Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). Based on the facts of this case, and considering the totality of the circumstances, the trial court's finding that the detention and search were justified was not an abuse of discretion. The ruling of the Court of Appeal is vacated, the trial court's ruling denying the motion to suppress is reinstated, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings.

Johnson, C.J., would deny and assigns reasons.

Weimer, J., concurs in the result.

Genovese, J., would deny for the reasons assigned by Chief Justice Johnson.

JOHNSON, C.J. would deny the writ for the following reasons. I would deny the State's writ application because I believe the search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment for the reasons given by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal below. The officers could not smell marijuana when they observed Mr. Tate and his companion. This Court's order suggests his location aroused suspicion, but as the Fourth Circuit noted: "Relator was seen doing nothing more than speaking to someone rolling a cigar with an unidentified substance on the busiest and most popular pedestrian street in Louisiana." State v. Tate , 2019-0863 p. 4 (10/11/19) * (La. App. 4 Cir. 2019), 280 So.3d 1210. This does not give police reasonable suspicion to stop and search a citizen.

WEIMER, J., concurring.

I concur in the result.

GENOVESE, J., would deny this writ for the reasons assigned by Chief Justice Johnson.


Summaries of

State v. Tate

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
Jan 14, 2020
286 So. 3d 1037 (La. 2020)
Case details for

State v. Tate

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MICHAEL TATE

Court:SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Jan 14, 2020

Citations

286 So. 3d 1037 (La. 2020)