Opinion ID: 2585223
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Whether Wasserman recognized the police

Text: The Wassermans argue that the trial court erred in finding that Wasserman recognized the men involved in the altercation as police officers. They contest the finding that Officer Bartholomew made eye contact with Wasserman when Wasserman was near the check-out counter. However, the trial court did not find that Officer Bartholomew and Wasserman actually made eye contact. Rather, the court found only that Officer Bartholomew reported that he thought he made eye contact. In addition, the trial court accurately found that Wasserman contended that he did not recognize the police at the time. Because these findings are supported by the evidence, they are not clearly erroneous. The Wassermans also dispute the trial court's finding that Wasserman knew, or should have known, that the individuals stopping him were law enforcement officers and that there was no doubt that Wasserman understood these men to be police officers. Wasserman testified that he heard someone yell Stop! and saw several dark-clad men with gun belts running after him. He claimed that he did not recognize the uniformed men as police and that they did not identify themselves as police. Delacruz stated that she thought the uniformed men were store security rent-a-cops, not police officers. The court supported its finding by the testimony of Arlene Abalahin, a cashier standing near Wasserman, who recognized the uniformed men as police when they entered the store. The involved police officers testified that they were wearing regular police uniforms. Several other witnesses also testified that they recognized the uniformed men as police. Given this evidence, the trial court's findings that the police were in uniform, and that Wasserman knew or should have known that the men were police, are not clearly erroneous.