Legal Document

448 U.S. 438 100 Supreme Court Reporter 2752 65 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 890 Tommy REID, Jr.v.State of GEORGIA. Number 79-448. June 30, 1980. PER CURIAM. 1 The petitioner was indicted in the Superior Fulton County, Ga., for possessing cocaine. At a hearing before trial, he moved to suppress introduction cocaine as evidence against him on ground that it had been seized from by an agent federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) violation his rights under Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. 2 relevant facts were determined at pretrial may be recounted briefly. arrived Atlanta Airport commercial airline flight Fort Lauderdale, Fla., early morning hours August 14, 1978. passengers left plane single file proceeded through concourse. observed DEA, who airport purpose uncovering illicit commerce narcotics. Separated several persons another man, carried shoulder bag like one carried. As they concourse past baggage claim area, occasionally looked backward direction second man. When reached main lobby terminal, man caught up with spoke briefly him. They then terminal building together. 3 DEA approached them outside building, identified himself narcotics agent, asked show their ticket stubs identification, which did. tickets purchased petitioner's credit card indicated men stayed Lauderdale only day. According agent's testimony, appeared nervous during encounter. if would agree return consent search bags. testified nodded head affirmatively, other responded, "Yeah, okay." three entered however, began run apprehended, abandoned bag. bag, when recovered, found contain 4 granted motion cocaine, concluding obtained result seizure without articulable suspicion unlawfully carrying Georgia Appeals reversed. 149 Ga.App. 685, 255 South Eastern Reporter, 2nd 71. It held stop permissible, citing Terry versus Ohio, 392 1, 88 1868, 20 889 (1968), since petitioner, "in number respects, fit 'profile' drug couriers compiled [DEA]." Ga.App., 686, S.E.2d, 72. appellate court also concluded consented person, after attempted flee discarded there existed probable cause 5 Amendments' prohibition searches seizures are not supported some objective justification governs all "including involve brief detention short traditional arrest. Davis Mississippi, 394 721, 89 1394, 22 676 (1969); 16-19, 1877-1878, (1968)." Brignoni-Ponce, 422 873, 878, 95 2574, 2578, 45 607 (1975).* While has recognized circumstances person detained briefly, arrest him, any curtailment person's liberty police must least reasonable is engaged criminal activity. See Brown Texas, 443 47, 51, 99 2637, 2640, 61 357 (1979); Delaware Prouse, 440 648, 661, 1391, 1400, 59 660 supra ; Adams Williams, 407 143, 146-149, 92 1921, 1923, 32 612 (1972); supra. 6 court's conclusion this case reasonably suspected wrongdoing rested fact so-called "drug courier profile," somewhat informal compilation characteristics believed typical Specifically, thought (1) principal place origin sold elsewhere country, (2) morning, law enforcement activity diminished, (3) companion trying conceal traveling together, (4) apparently no luggage than 7 We conclude could matter law, have basis these circumstances. Of relied on, preceded relates particular conduct. describe very large category presumably innocent travelers, subject virtually random little foundation justify seizure. Nor can we agree, record, manner walked led suspect wrongdoing. Although could, course, wholly lawful conduct might afoot, see supra, U.S., 27-28, S.Ct., 1883, such case. belief attempting more "inchoate unparticularized or 'hunch,' " 27, fair inference light experience, simply too slender reed support 8 For reasons, judgment cannot sustained insofar rests determination lawfully terminal. Accordingly, petition certiorari granted, vacated, remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 9 so ordered. 10 Mr. Justice REHNQUIST dissents reasons stated STEWART opinion Mendenhall, 446 544, 1870, 64 497 (1980). He believes involved did implicate Amendment petitioners. 11 POWELL, whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE BLACKMUN join, concurring.1 12 This similar many respects (1980), defendant walking stopped agents identification. threshold question here, whether initial constituted within meaning Amendment. STEWART, joined REHNQUIST, mere stopping identification purposes seizure: 13 "We 'seized' if, view surrounding incident, free leave." Id., 554, 1877.2 14 Thus, remarkably those present case, decided occurred. 15 My concurring BLACKMUN, joined, consider issue because raised courts below. Even seizure, my grounds believing individual Therefore, violate routine questioning. & N Dec. Immigration Nationality Decisions expressly stated, decision reach necessarily indicate disagreement views REHNQUIST. 560, n. 1873.3 16 state courts, our seized. Rather, assumed questioning addressed actions justified suspicion. Because similarly do today, remains open consideration opinions Mendenhall. * "Obviously, personal intercourse between policemen citizens involves 'seizures' persons. Only officer, means physical force authority, way restrained citizen occurred." 19, 16, (1968). id., 34, 1879, 1886 (WHITE, J., concurring); 31, 32-33, 1885, (HARLAN, concurring). fragmentary upon "seizure." noted '[t]here nothing Constitution prevents policeman addressing questions anyone streets.' 553, 1876, quoting S.Ct.1868, 1886, (1968) ante, 440, WHITE, BRENNAN, MARSHALL, STEVENS, filed dissenting Mendenhall respondent

Classification Label: 0