Opinion ID: 1925383
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Prior Delaware Decisions

Text: Although Riley's presence in a liquor store parking lot (arguably a location known for the crime of providing alcohol to minors,) may be a factor police can consider in establishing reasonable suspicion, by itself it is not sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion. In Cummings v. State, [30] this Court reviewed facts somewhat similar to those in Riley. In Cummings, an officer observed two individuals in a vehicle in the parking lot of the Delaware Waste Treatment Plant, which was closed at that time. [31] The men drove their vehicle out of the lot as the officer approached the car. [32] This Court held that on those facts alone, the officer did not have reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify a seizure. [33] In Cummings, we noted that the area of the stop was not a high crime area and while the officer had responded to burglar alarms in the area, police were not employing special vigilance because of unusual criminal activity. [34] The vehicle was parked during daylight hours on state property open to the public. We stated that leaving an area upon sighting a police officer is not, in itself, suspicious conduct. [35]