Court Opinion

ID: 9559664
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:33:24.371881+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:29.166769
License: Public Domain

GERBER, Judge,
specially concurring,
I concur in this result only because the newly-constituted Supreme Court of the United States has mandated it under Bostick. Our duty to follow its decisions does not include a duty to praise it for now deviating from what that same Court, or at least that same institution, wrote a few years prior to Bostick:
[E]ven assuming that [the purpose of crime prevention] is served to some degree by [an officer’s] stopping and demanding identification from an individual without any specific basis for believing he is involved in criminal activity, the guarantees of the Fourth Amendment do not allow it. When such a stop is not based on objective criteria, the risk of arbitrary and abusive police practices exceeds tolerable limits.
Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47, 52, 99 S.Ct. 2637, 2641, 61 L.Ed.2d 357 (1979).