Opinion ID: 2233565
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Was There Sufficient Cause To Stop Defendant.

Text: Defendant contends that Chief of Police Larson did not have sufficient cause to stop defendant and that therefore any information obtained as a result of the illegal stop was inadmissible at defendant's trial. In State v. Burkman, 281 N.W.2d 436 (S.D.1979), we held that it is proper for a police officer to question persons when the circumstances reasonably indicate that such questioning is necessary to the proper discharge of the officer's official duties. We also held that [a] police officer has both the right and duty to make a reasonable investigation of suspicious activities even though the nature of the activities may fall short of grounds sufficient to justify an arrest or a search. Id. at 439. We followed this holding in State v. Soft, 329 N.W.2d 128 (S.D.1983), and in State v. Clabaugh, 346 N.W.2d 448 (S.D.1984). When measured against the Burkman test, Officer Larson's investigatory stop of defendant was reasonable under the circumstances. Defendant was seen approaching the burglarized building through an alley within a relatively short time after the entry had been made. From the fact that the burglar had placed the targeted personal property near the point of entry, had placed a suitcase and a flashlight in a convenient location, and had apparently stanched an entry-inflicted wound near the point of his exit from the building, Officer Larson could reasonably conclude that whoever had entered the building would return to the scene to reap the fruits of his entry. Accordingly, we hold that the investigatory stop of defendant was reasonable under the circumstances. Having properly stopped defendant for questioning, Officer Larson was well within his rights in asking defendant for identification and in requiring him to display his hands for evidence of recent wounds. The evidence resulting from Officer Larson's questioning and request for an inspection of defendant's hands revealed probable cause for arresting defendant and searching his clothes as an incident to that arrest. State v. Burkman, supra ; Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968).