Court Opinion

ID: 9553907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:37:17.037649+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:33.814635
License: Public Domain

Dore, J.
(concurring) — I do not believe that the United States Supreme Court decision in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 20 L. Ed. 2d 889, 88 S. Ct. 1868 (1968) justifies Wheeler's original detention. Nevertheless, I concur in the majority's decision to affirm Wheeler's conviction on the basis that the police officer's actions in detaining Wheeler constituted a *241valid arrest.1
In order to arrest an individual, the police must have probable cause that the individual has committed a crime. In this case, at the time of Wheeler's detention, the officers knew: (1) that a possible burglary had occurred; (2) that there were two suspects who were both black males; (3) and that one of the suspects was wearing a bright blue shirt with stripes. When they arrived at the scene of the burglary, the police met a reporter and he indicated the following:
A [The reporter] stated to me that he had seen a black male wearing a bright blue sweater with stripes on it in this area right here along Rainier Avenue (indicating).
Q What did you do then in response to that?
A Officer Smith and I at 4608 South Cloverdale got back in our patrol vehicle, drove down Cloverdale to 50th, along 50th to Rainier Place South, then to Rainier Avenue South. We looked up northbound on Rainier, and we saw the person [the reporter] had seen with the bright blue sweater with stripes on it, the black male. He was walking fast on northbound on this side would be the west side of the street in front of this building right here (indicating) which is a restaurant.
Q What did you do then?
A We drove up the sidewalk here (indicating) and stopped this individual at the northeast corner of the building.
Q What was the condition of the individual at that time?
A The man we stopped was sweating very heavily, and he was out of breath.
Verbatim Report of Proceedings, at 67.
I believe these facts constitute probable cause for an arrest, and I would affirm Wheeler's conviction on this basis only.

The State has never conceded that Wheeler's original stop was not an arrest. In the suppression hearing, the State argued and the court ruled that the original detention was a valid Terry stop, but this court may affirm the order denying the motion to suppress on alternative grounds. Ertman v. Olympia, 95 Wn.2d 105, 108, 621 P.2d 724 (1980).