Opinion ID: 158881
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Seizure and Probable Cause under the Fourth Amendment and Wyoming Law

Text: 12 The United States concedes that, notwithstanding Patrolman Waters' statement to Davis that he was not under arrest, Davis was effectively arrested. We must therefore determine whether Davis' arrest satisfied the requirements of the Fourth Amendment and Wyoming law.
13 The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable . . . seizures. U.S. Const. amend. IV. An arrest is a seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes and is reasonable where there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been or is being committed. Henry v. United States, 361 U.S. 98, 102 (1959). Probable cause is measured against an objective standard. Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 96 (1964). It is evaluated in relation to the circumstances as they would have appeared to prudent, cautious and trained police officers. United States v. McCormick, 468 F.2d 68, 73 (10th Cir. 1972). The subjective belief of an individual officer as to whether there was probable cause for making an arrest is not dispositive. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 507 (1983). 14 Davis concedes that the felony stop was reasonable but argues that his continued detention was not. We disagree. In light of the circumstances, the officers had ample cause to believe that Davis had violated Wyoming law. Wyoming prohibits property destruction and defacement, defined as knowingly defac[ing], injur[ing] or destroy[ing] property of another without the owner's consent. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-3-201(a) (1999). Wyoming also prohibits breach of the peace, defined as using threatening, abusive or obscene language or violent actions with knowledge or probable cause to believe [these] will disturb the peace. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-6-102(a) (1999). Davis reportedly had threatened to shatter his estranged girlfriend's windshield and then admitted to having done so. Davis also reportedly had threatened Mr. Duvall over the telephone, appeared at his home demanding that he step outside, and announced that someone was going to be shot. Prudent, cautious, trained police officers could reasonably have believed that Davis had committed two crimes under these circumstances. Therefore, probable cause under the Fourth Amendment existed for the effective arrest of Davis.
15 Under Wyoming law, a peace officer may arrest a suspect without a written warrant when [t]he officer has probable cause to believe that a misdemeanor has been committed, that the person to be arrested has committed it and that the person, unless immediately arrested . . . [m]ay cause injury to himself or others or damage to property. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-2-102(b)(iii)(B) (1999). 16 Davis concedes that concern might have been justified, but argues that probable cause to expect continued criminal activity was dissipated by the absence of weapons. We find to the contrary. At the time the officers arrested Davis, they had probable cause to believe that he had committed property destruction and defacement and breach of the peace. They also had reason to believe that Davis carried an automatic rifle. They had found ammunition, a holster and loaders, but had not found the gun. They had learned of an unfinished encounter with Duvall. Finally, they had found Davis under the influence of alcohol in a rowdy nightclub district. Under these circumstances the officers had ample cause under § 7-2-102 to believe that Davis had committed two misdemeanors and that he may have gone on to cause further injury or damage to person or property unless immediately arrested. Therefore, Davis' effective arrest was justified under Wyoming law. 17