United States v. Slater, No. 19-2800 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence of a firearm. The court held that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion that defendant and his companion were the assailants described in a 911 call so as to have justification to stop them in the first place. In this case, defendant and his companion were two men, they matched the generic description of the assailants, they were in close temporal and geographical proximity to the crime, their clothing partly matched the assailants' clothing, and they were walking away from the crime scene. Having concluded that reasonable suspicion existed to justify the stop, the court had no trouble concluding further that reasonable suspicion existed to justify the frisk.
Court Description: [Gruender, Author, with Colloton and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. In light of the totality of the circumstances, the police officer had reasonable suspicion that defendant and his companion were suspects involved in an assault; the men matched the generic description of the assailants, they were in close temporal and geographical proximity to the crime, their clothing matched the description of the clothes worn by the assailants and they were walking away from the site of the crime; as there was reasonable suspicion to justify the stop, the officers also had reasonable suspicion to conduct a frisk. [ November 04, 2020 ]
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.