# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 5- 18 94

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Terren ce Lam ar Hawk in s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - J effe rs on Cit y

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 9, 2 01 6
Fil ed : J ul y

26 , 20 16

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , LOKE N and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

LOKEN, Ci rcu it Ju dg e.

Lin co ln Uni ve rs it y (“ LU”) po li ce of fic ers de ta in ed an d se arch ed Terren ce
Hawki ns in th e st ud en t cafe te ria on two oc cas io ns in earl y 20 11

. Bo th ti m es , th ey
di sc ov ered he was carr y in g a lo ad ed pi st ol

. Hawki ns was in di ct ed an d co nv ic te d of

be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of two fir earm s, vi ol at io ns of 18 U.S.C. § 92 2( g) (1 ). Heap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ni al of hi s pr et ri a l mo t io n to su pp res s th e fir earm s 1

se iz ed du rin g t he two sea rch es . W e affi rm

.

I. Th e Fir st Sea rch a nd Sei zure

.

On Febr ua ry 24

, 20 11

, LU Po li ce Ch ie f Bi ll Nels on an d th ree fell ow offi cers

-- Greg McKi nn ey , Kev in Pi gf or d

, a n d Dam on Nun n -- ga th ered fo r lu nc h at LU’ s

st ud en t cafe te ria

. The y no ti ced a m an se at ed al on e (la te r id en ti fie d as Hawki ns ), who

ap pe ared in to xi cat ed an d was no t eat in g. Neit he r th e of fic ers no r st ud en ts th ey as ke d

reco gn iz ed H aw kin s. Ch ie f Nels on an d Offi cer Nun n ap pr oa ch ed Hawki ns an d as ke d

fo r id en ti fic at io n. H e w a s un ke m pt

, hi s ey es were bl oo ds ho t, an d he sm el le d of

al co ho l. As Hawki ns ret rie ve d h is id en ti fic at io n, Ch ie f Nel so n s aw a la rg e am ou nt

of cas h in Hawki ns ’s wall et

. W hi le Offi cer Nun n r e q u e s te d a reco rd s ch eck fro m
di sp at ch

, Ch ie f Nels on as ke d Hawki ns if he was an LU st ud en t. Hawki ns rep li ed

, in

sl ur red sp eech

, th at he ha d “ be en a st ud en t of f an d on .” Mi nu te s la te r, Offi cer Nun n

rep or te d th at Hawki ns was no t a st ud en t, ha d a cri m in al hi st or y , a nd was k n o w n to

be arm ed

. Mea nwh il e, Offi cer McKi nn ey te le ph on ed Pro b a t i o n a n d Paro le an d

le arn ed th at Hawki ns ha d a pri or fel on y co nv ic ti on

.

At th is po in t, Hawki ns st oo d up bu t co m pl ie d whe n Ch ie f Nels on an d Offi cer

Pi gf or d in st ru ct ed hi m to be se at ed

. W he n Hawki ns st oo d, Offi cers Nun n an d Pi gf or d

no ti ced a bu lg e in hi s le ft pa nt s po ck et an d to ld Ch ie f Nels on th ey w e r e c o n cern ed

th e bu lg e was a weap on

. The Ch ie f as ke d Hawki ns wha t was in hi s po ck et

. Hawki ns

sa id it was m on ey

. The Ch ie f rep li ed th at he ha d se en Hawki ns ’s m on ey in hi s wall et

. Hawki ns th en sa id th e bu lg e was “ no th in g.” Offi cer Nun n as ke d if he co ul d ret rie ve

th e it em fro m th e po ck et

. Hawki ns refu se d. Ch ie f Nels on th en to ld H a w k i n s t h e y

The Hon or ab le Bri an C. W im es , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1

Dis tri ct of Mi ss ou ri, ad op ti ng th e Rep or t an d Recom m en da tio n of the H on or ab le Mat t J. Whit wor th , Uni te d S ta te s M ag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-were go in g to se arch hi s po ck et fo r th e sa fet y o f t h e of fic ers an d th os e in th e

c a f et eri a. As Offi cer Nun n m ot io ne d or reac he d “ to ch eck th e po ck et ,” Hawki n s
bo lt ed

. The of

fic ers ta ck le d an d res tra in ed hi m

. In th e pr oc es s, Offi cer M cKin ne y
fel t a ha rd ob

ject fro m ou ts id e Hawki ns ’s le ft pa nt s po ck et

, reac he d in to th e po ck et

,

an d p ul le d o ut a lo ad ed ha nd gu n a nd m ari juan a.

Hawki ns m ov ed to su pp res s th is ev id en ce, a r g u i n g t h e of fic ers di d no t ha ve

reas on ab le su sp ic io n to de ta in hi m aft er th ey d i s c o v e r e d h e was no t a st ud en t, an d

th ey il le ga ll y se arch ed hi s po ck et

. The di st ric t cou rt den ie d th e m ot io n, rul in g th at : (i) Hawki ns ’s in te ract io n wit h th e of fic ers was co ns en su al up to th e po in t th e of fic ers

or de red hi m to be se at ed ; (ii ) at th at po in t, th e en co un te r be cam e an in ve st ig at iv e st op

un de r Terry v. Ohi o, 39 2 U.S. 1 (1 96 8) ; (ii i) th e of fic ers ha d reas on ab le su sp ic io n to

d e t a i n Hawki ns whe n he at te m pt ed to fle e; an d (iv ) at th is po in t, th e of fic ers ha d

acq ui red reas on ab le su sp ic io n to be li ev e Hawki ns “ was arm ed an d da ng e r o u s ” to jus ti fy a weap on s s earc h u nd er Terr y

.

On ap pe al

, Hawki ns ch al le ng es no ne of th es e ru li ng s, co nc ed in g th at th e Terry

st op was p erm is si bl e. He co nt en ds

, ho wev er, tha t th e st op be cam e a de fa ct o arre st

whe n th e of

fic ers “ th reat en ed ” an d “ at te m pt ed ” an un co ns ti tu ti on al se arch
-- na m el y ,

“ reac hi ng in to hi s po ck e t ” b e f o r e co nd uc ti ng a pa t-d own se arch to de te rm in e if he

was in fact arm ed an d da ng ero us

. He arg ue s th at th is al le ge d arre st was no t su pp or te d
by pr ob ab le cau se ; th us , “ an y ev id en ce se iz ed fo ll owi ng th at po in t m us t be ex cl ud ed

as fru it of th e un co ns ti tu ti on al arre st .” W e rev ie w de no vo whe th er t h e d et en ti on

am ou nt ed to an a r r e s t

, bu t rev ie w fin di ng s “ as to wha t th e pa rti es sa id or di d” fo r
cl ear erro r. Uni te d St at es v. Bl oo m fie ld , 4 0 F.3 d 91 0, 91 6, 91 8 (8 th Ci r. 19 94 ) (en

ba nc ), cert . den ie d, 5 14 U.S. 11 13 (19 95 ).

Hawki ns ’s arg um en t as su m es th at th e o ffi cers in te nd ed to fo reg o a pa t-d own

se arch whe n Office r Nun n reach ed to ward Hawki ns ’s po ck et

. Bu t t he reco rd is no t

so cl ear. Offi cer Nun n’s ha nd ne ve r reac he d Hawki ns ’s po ck et

, so wha t wou ld ha ve

-3

-ha pp en ed ha d Hawki ns no t fle d is hypo th et ic al

. Co ns is te nt wit h Ch ie f Nels on ’s

te st im on y , th e di st ric t co ur t si m pl y fo un d th at “ th e Ch ie f to ld [Hawk i n s ] t h a t th ey

were go in g to se arch hi s po ck et s.” Hawki ns ’s arg um en t als o rest s on th e erro ne ou s
le ga l pr em is e th at a pa t do wn is th e on ly pe rm is si bl e way to co nd uc t a Terry fri s k.

A Terry se arch m

us t be “ reas on ab le ” un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces , se e Terry, 39 2 U.S. at

29 ; “ of fic ers m ay ta ke an y m eas ur e s t ha t are reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry to pr ot ect th ei r

pe rs on al sa fet y an d to m ai nt ai n th e st at us qu o du rin g th e co ur se of th e st op .” Uni te d

St at es v. Newel l, 59 6 F.3 d 87 6, 87 9 (8 th Ci r.) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

, cert

. de ni ed

, 56 2

U.S. 86 4 (20 10 ). Tho ug h a pa t-d own is of te n th e le as t in tru si ve way to se arch fo r a

hi dd en fir earm , co nc ern fo r of fic er sa fet y m ay jus ti fy li fti ng cl ot hi ng or ev en reac hi ng
di rect ly fo r a weap on in a wais tb an d. See, e.g ., Ada m s v. W il li am s, 4 0 7 U

. S

. 1 43

, 14 4- 48 (1 97 2) ; Uni te d Stat es v. Bake r, 78 F.3 d 13 5, 13 7- 38 (4 th Ci r. 19 96 ); Uni te d

St at es v. Hi ll , 54 5 F .2d 11 91 , 11 93 (9t h C ir. 1 97 6) (pe r cu ria m ).

Thu s, th e qu es ti on is whe th er th e of fic ers ’ th reat to pe rfo rm a pr ot ect iv e se arch

, whe n th ey ha d reas on ab le su sp ic io n th at Hawki ns was arm ed an d da ng ero us , co up le d

wit h a reac h, tra ns fo rm ed th e la wfu l Terry st op in to a fu ll -b lo wn arre st

. A “ Terry

st op m ay be co m e an arre st

, req ui rin g pr ob ab le cau se , if th e s t o p l as ts fo r an

un reas on ab ly l on g ti m e or if o ffi cers us e un reas on ab le fo rce.” Newel l, 59 6 F.3 d at

87 9 (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. Here, th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at th e de te nt io n was “ fai rly

br ie f” an d la st ed “ on ly fo r th e pe rio d of ti m e ne ces sa ry to res ol ve [ H a w k i n s’s]

su sp ic io us be ha vi or .” Hawki ns was no t to uc he d un ti l he at te m pt ed to fle e th is la wfu l

de te nt io n. Non e of th e us ua l in d i c a t or s of a de fa ct o arre st are pr es en t -- Hawki ns

was no t ha nd cu ffed

, is ol at ed

, m ov ed to a co p car, or hu m il ia te d in an y way

. See

Bl oo m fie ld , 40 F.3d at 9 17

.

Hawki ns ci te s no cas e -- an d we ha ve fo un d no ne -- ru li ng t h at a th reat to

se arch an d a reac h tran sf

or m ed a Terry st op in to an arre st

. The th ree cas es he rel ie s

on al l in vo lv e d ac tu al se arch es of th e de fen da nt

, an d no ne in vo lv ed reas on ab le

su sp ic io n th at th e su sp ect was arm ed

. See Sib ro n v. New Yor k, 39 2 U.S. 40

, 62 -6 3

-4

-(1 96 8) ; Uni te d St at es v. Aqu in o, 67 4 F.3 d 91 8, 92 6- 27 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ); Uni te d St at es

v. Cas ad o, 30 3 F.3 d 44 0 (2 d Ci r. 20 02 ). In th es e ci rcu m st an ces , we de cl in e to ad op t

Hawki ns ’s pr op os ed ru le th at a th reat to pe rfo rm a se arch co ns ti tu te s a de fa ct o arre st

. W e aff irm th e d en ia l o f hi s m ot io n t o s up pr es s ev id en ce s ei zed in th e fi rs t s earc h.

II . The Se co nd Sea rch a nd Sei zure

.

Afte r Hawki ns was arre st ed on Feb ru ary 24

, Offi cer McKi nn ey or al ly warn ed

hi m th at he co ul d no t tre sp as s on LU gr ou n d s in th e fu tu re. One m on th la te r, on

Mar c h 2 4

, LU po li ce of

fic ers , in cl ud in g Offi cers Nun n, McKi nn ey , an d Pi gf or d,

res po nd ed to a rep or t th at Hawki ns was ag ai n in th e LU s tu de nt cafe te ria

. F i n d in g
Hawki ns in th e sa m e se at he oc cu pi ed a m on th earl ie r, th e of fic ers arre st ed Hawki ns

fo r vi ol at in g M is so ur i t res pa ss law, Mo

. Rev

. St at . § 5 69 .14 0. A se arch in ci de nt to

th e arre st un co ve red a lo ad ed ha nd gu n, th e fir earm ch a r g e d in th e se co nd co un t of

co nv ic ti on

. Hawki ns arg ue s th e fir earm sh o u l d be su pp res se d be cau se he ha d no

va li d pr io r no ti ce th at hi s m ere pr es en ce on th e LU cam pu s wou ld co ns ti tu te cri m in al

tre sp as s.

The Mi ss ou ri t res pa ss st at ut e p ro vi de s:

1. A pe rs on co m

m it s th e cri m e of tre sp as s in th e fir st de gr ee if he
kn owi ng ly en te rs un la w f ul ly or kn owi ng ly rem ai ns un la wfu ll y in a bu il di ng or i nh ab it ab le st ru ct ur e o r up on real pro pe rty.

2. A pe rs on do es no t co m m it th e cri m e of tre sp as s in th e fir st de gr ee by

en te rin g or rem ai ni ng up on real pr op ert y un le ss th e real pr op ert y is
fen ced or ot he rwis e en cl os ed

. . . or as to whi ch no ti ce agai ns t tres pa ss is gi ve n b y :

(1 ) Actu al

co mmun ic at io n t o t he ac to r

. . .

-5

-§ 5 6 9.1 40 (1 )-(2 ) (em ph as is ad de d)

. It is un di sp ut ed th at Hawki ns rece iv ed an or a l

no -tr e s p a s s n o t ic e on Feb ru ary 24

. Acco rd in gl y , th e di st ric t co ur t ru le d th at th e

of fic ers ha d pr ob ab le cau se to arre st Hawki ns on Mar ch 24 fo r vi ol at in g § 569 .14 0,

an d th at th e se arch in ci de nt to hi s ar r e st was va li d. W e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s

fact ua l fin di ng s fo r cl ear erro r an d it s de te rm in at io n of pr ob ab le cau se de no vo

. See

Orn el as v. Un it ed Sta te s, 5 17 U.S. 69 0, 6 99 (19 96 ).

Co ns is te nt wit h th e pl ai n la ng ua ge of th e st at ut e, th e Mi ss o u r i C o ur t of
App eal s he ld in St at e v. McC art hy, 7 15 S.W .2d 33 7, 3 37 -3 8 (M o. Ap p. 1 98 6) , t ha t

an or al warn in g no t to tre sp as s on W as hi ng to n Uni v e r si ty’ s cam pu s was su ffi ci en t

ev id en ce to su st ai n a § 56 9.1 40 co nv ic ti on

. Bu t a pu bl is he d LU po li cy pr ov id ed th at

a n or al no -tr es pa ss or de r ex pi res aft er fiv e da y s. The refo re, Hawki ns arg ue s, as h e
di d in th e di st ric t co ur t, th e se arch in ci de nt t o h is arre st was in va li d be cau se “ Mr.

Hawki ns c o u l d n ot vi ol at e a no tre sp as s or de r th at

, pe r writ te n un iv ers it y po li cy ,

ceas ed to be effe ct iv e fi ve da y s af te r it was i ss ue d.”

Thi s co nt en ti on ig no res th e fact th at th e is su e is whe th er th e po li ce of fic ers ha d

pr ob ab le cau se to arre st Hawki ns fo r vi ol at in g § 56 9.1 40

, no t whe th er he wou ld ha ve
be en co nv ic te d fo r vi ol at in g th e st at ut e. Cf. Heie n v. Nor th Caro li na , 13 5 S. Ct

. 53 0,

53 6 (20 14 ); Mic hi ga n v. DiFi ll ip po , 44 3 U.S. 31

, 37 -3 8 (19 79 ). W he n ask ed at th e

su pp res si on he ari ng ab ou t th e po li cy (wh ic h ne it he r co un se l m ad e pa rt of th e reco rd

on a p p e a l), Ch ie f Nels on te st ifi ed th at he ha d be en pr ev io us ly ad vi se d by th e lo cal

co un ty pr o s e cu to r th at an or al no -tr es pa ss or de r “ is su ffi ci en t. It’s as go od as a
writ te n no tre sp as s or de r. And so th at ’s th e po li cy th at w e c u r r e nt [ly] fo ll ow.”

Offi cer M cKin ne y , on e o f th e arr es ti ng off ic ers , con fir m ed th at tes ti m on y

.

The cri m in al tre sp as s s ta tu te req ui red “ [a]ctu al co m m un ic at io n” to Hawki ns

. The arre st in g of

fic ers kn ew th at H a w k i n s ha d pr io r act ua l or al no ti ce th at he co ul d

no t la wfu ll y en te r or rem ai n on th e LU cam pu s. The lo cal pr os ecu to r ha d ad vi se d th e

LU po li ce th at or al no ti ce is “ as go od as a writ te n no tre sp as s or de r” in en fo rci ng th e

-6

-tre sp as s st at ut e on cam pu s. W he n co nf

ro nt ed

, Hawki ns , a no n- st ud en t, di d no t ob ject

th at th e LU fiv e-d ay po li cy pr ecl ud ed hi s arre st

. In th es e ci rcu m st an ces , we co nc lu de

th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err whe n it ru le d th at th e of fic ers ha d pr ob ab le cau se to arre st

Hawki ns an d to co nd u c t a se arch in ci de nt to arre st th at un co ve red th e fir earm , an d

th eref or e th at Hawki ns ’s m ot io n t o s up pr es s s ho ul d b e d en ie d.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-