By Christian Palmer | Arizona Capitol Times | Jan. 27, 2009

Decision overturns previous ruling by Arizona Appeals Court

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously to overturn an Arizona Court of Appeals opinion limiting the power of police to conduct physical searches of citizens during routine encounters.

The appeal to the nation's highest court stems from a 2007 split decision by a Tucson appellate panel that found police did not have sufficient reason to conduct a "pat-down" search of Lemon Montrea Johnson after he agreed to get out of a vehicle during a traffic stop for an unrelated matter in 2002.

In writing the Court of Appeals 2-to-1 majority opinion, Judge J. William Brammer noted Johnson's interaction with police was cooperative, "wholly unrelated to the purpose of the traffic stop" and that no one in the vehicle was suspected of criminal activity during the stop.

According to court documents, Johnson, dressed entirely in gang colors worn by the Crips criminal street gang, was a passenger in the car pulled over by a street gang task force near the Sugar Hill neighborhood of Tucson, an area known as a hotbed of gang activity.

Officers at the scene reportedly pulled over the vehicle with suspended insurance and were not involved in a gang investigation, but questioning of Johnson revealed he was from Eloy and was recently served a prison sentence for burglary.

The arresting officer noted Eloy was home to the Trekkle Park Crips, and that Johnson was carrying a police scanner in his pocket before the officer asked him to exit the car, according to court documents.

A subsequent search and struggle revealed a handgun and marijuana. He was later found guilty of possession of a weapon by a prohibited possessor and possession of marijuana.

Prior to the release of the U.S. Supreme Court opinion, Meir Feder, an attorney with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said a broad ruling favoring the Arizona Attorney General's Office would result in granting police the power to simply strike up conversations with people and then search them.

Acting on established case precedents, the high court ruled "stop-and-frisk" searches can be conducted if officers can reasonably suspect the detainee is armed and dangerous.

Writing for the court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg instructed the arresting police officer was not "constitutionally required to give Johnson an opportunity to depart the scene after he exited the vehicle without first ensuring that, in so doing, she was not permitting a dangerous person to get behind her."