Court Opinion

ID: 9696716
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:55:53.689845+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:25.850349
License: Public Domain

YEAGLEY, Associate Judge
(concurring) :
I concur in the opinion of the court insofar as it finds no “plain view” basis for the seizure of the medicine vial from appellant’s auto. I have some difficulty, however, in finding circumstances present here to justify the initial intrusion into the car. The clear right of the officers to make a spot check justified them in asking the appellant to produce his driver’s permit and car registration,1 which the officer said was done promptly. Those papers bejng in order, the earlier furtive movements of the passenger below the seat and the presence of a hole in the front door latch do not, in my view, provide the ingredients needed to make a search of the car reasonable lacking a prior custodial arrest. Watts v. United States, D.C.App., 297 A.2d 790 (1972), and authorities cited therein.

. See Palmore v. United States, D.C.App., 290 A.2d 573, 583 (1972), aff’d on other grounds, 411 U.S. 389, 93 S.Ct. 1670, 36 L.Ed.2d 342 (1973).