Latest Headlines
- A Very Good Boy: ECSO K-9 Streeter Awarded Medal Of Courage For Jumping Off Bridge After Suspect
- Plans Refiled For Circle K At Highway 95A, Quintette Road; Intersection Improvements Proposed
- Escambia School Board Buys 36 Acres For $3.9 Million For New Beulah School
- Head On Crash Injures Two In Beulah
- FWC Removes 14 Boaters For Boating Under The Influence During Blue Angels Air Show
- Century Spending Over $3.3 Million On Five Sewage Lift Stations
- Escambia Man Gets Life Sentence For Murdering Roommate Before Staging Her Drowning
- Catholic’s TJ McCants Drafted By Chicago White Sox
- Man Gets 50 Years In Prison For 2022 Murder At Cantonment Gas Station
- Pedestrian Checking Trailer Tire Struck By Car In Two Vehicle Crash Near Century
Supreme Court Rules In Escambia Case: Car’s Color Not Enough For Traffic Stop
July 7, 2014
A divided Florida Supreme Court has overturned the conviction of an Escambia County man who was found to have cocaine and marijuana after a deputy pulled him over based on the color of his car.
The case stemmed from an Escambia County Sheriff’s deputy in June 2010 running the license tag number on a bright green Chevrolet through a state database. The database indicated the car had been registered as being the color blue, an inconsistency that led the deputy to pull over the car.
During the stop, the deputy noticed the smell of marijuana, leading to a search of the car that turned up marijuana, crack cocaine and cash.
The driver of the car, Kerrick Teamer, was later convicted of trafficking in cocaine, possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia, according to the Supreme Court ruling.
Teamer sought to suppress the drug evidence, arguing it was the result of an illegal, warrant-less search.
The 1st District Court of Appeal sided with Teamer, and the Supreme Court in a 5-2 ruling agreed that the evidence should have been suppressed.
The majority said changing the color of a car is not “inherently suspicious” enough to justify a stop by police and that it is not illegal to repaint a vehicle without notifying the state Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
“The law allows officers to draw rational inferences, but to find reasonable suspicion based on this single noncriminal factor would be to license investigatory stops on nothing more than an officer’s hunch,” said the majority opinion, written by Justice Peggy Quince and joined by Chief Justice Jorge Labarga and justices Barbara Pariente, R. Fred Lewis and James E.C. Perry.
“Doing so would be akin to finding reasonable suspicion for an officer to stop an individual for walking in a sparsely occupied area after midnight simply because that officer testified that, in his experience, people who walk in such areas after midnight tend to commit robberies.”
But Justice Charles Canady, in a dissent joined by Justice Ricky Polston, wrote that a “reasonable officer” could have suspected that the license tag had been illegally transferred from another car. “The majority is wholly unjustified in categorizing an undeniably objective factor as a hunch,” Canady wrote.
by The News Service of Florida
Comments
33 Responses to “Supreme Court Rules In Escambia Case: Car’s Color Not Enough For Traffic Stop”
This if just. we are fast on our way to a police state the police are determined to have complete control of society. if you had a cop for every citizen you would have crime. it is proven the police commit many crimes, such as collusion when filling out police reports. police reports are supposed to be written separately but if you watch them you will see them collude. and they commit. rico violations of law are not uncommon with police. these and many other violations of law are a constant and ongoing
If you reread the story again you will see, he was pulled over because the color of the car didn’t match the DMV records. But here is an idea just remove the color from DMV database like most states do
Mike,
I work in corrections and we have tons of blond haired, blue-eyed guys in here for drugs. Don’t make general statements like that. As I said before, he was pulled over for tag switching and got caught in criminal activity because he’s a criminal! Not a very smart one either, since he got caught for such a stupid error.
What no one is talking about and what this case really is about is profiling. The cop looked over and saw a black man and pulled him over and like they usually do scrambled to think of (reverse engineer) a legitimate reason why they should have stopped him.
I’ve been stopped before on some bogus DMV excuse because the age on the registration they had on file didn’t match the age the officer thought I was when he looked over at me . . . really?!? This is the reason the war on drugs has never worked, people not fitting their profile with blond hair and blue eyes are driving semi truck loads of drugs passed them while they’re worried about ages and car colors.
So, how does one go about changing their records with the DMV? Is it a requirement that I inform the government of a color change? Should I have asked permission first?
I have a repainted vehicle, and I don’t want to get pulled over and cavity-searched.
Well, here’s my two cents . . . .
What was the probable cause for running the tag to find out it was on the wrong color vehicle? It is a waste of time – and therefore money – to randomly run tags for the sake of curiosity. I mean, until he ran the tag, he had no idea it was on the “wrong” vehicle. There must have been SOMETHING that made the deputy run the tag. Was it simply racial profiling? That, too, is wrong and unethical. Granted, this fella is guilty of far greater things than altering the appearance of the vehicle (if he actually did) but we don’t live in a police state where we can be stopped and questioned just to satisfy the officers’ curiosity.
I think Teamer deserves punishment for the drugs, but I’m gonna side with the Court’s majority on this one. . . .
I value my right to privacy too much not to.
MY CONCERN IS IT TOOK OVER FOUR YEARS FOR THIS TO GET THROUGH THE SYSTEM. THE WHEELS OF JUSTICE ARE IN NEED OF SOME GREASE.
If it was me an I ran the tag and found the color different. I would check to see if the car is the same make and model before I assume that it is a switch. Chances are if the color is the only difference, then it has just been repainted and is fine.
The supreme court loves thugs……get used to it
The deputy didnt know the color of the car before he ran the tag to clear up some confusion.. Of course you can have a car painted and not be arrested or even stopped. The problem isn’t that it was painted. It’s that he never had the color updated at thw dmv,which is a reason to stop and check. My advice..if youre gonn do something illegal with your car that has been painted..you might want to update the color at the dmv.
So if the arrestee had updated his records at the DMV,which is what most people do,then he wouldn’t have been stopped in the first place. Sounds like if he wants to transport drugs and/or paraphernalia and not get stopped then I’d think his first stop once he’s released might be to the dmv. His own laziness got him arrested,not the deputy who was simply doing his job.
Thank you Claire and BT. Now I don’t feel like the only 1 with common sense @ here.
I think that the Supreme Court got it right this time.
As a law-abiding citizen, I don’t want some overly zealous guy with a badge pulling me over because I decide to get a paint job. I hate to see this thug get away with something, but id rather see him get away with something than dozens of innocents get harassed to justify a fishing expedition, even if they did get lucky and catch a fish this time.
Don’t worry, though. This guy’s living on borrowed time anyway. Either next time he won’t get away with it, or the same drug trade that gives him that smug look will do him in.
Way to go Supreme Courts! Now he can get out and make more money selling and also be on food stamps and hud housing while the rest of us work to pay our bills and barely afford to pay bills…well played! He will probably sue the county and state for wrongful imprisonment and a million other things.
I reserve my constitutional right to paint my car in ridiculous colors and apply trademarked mascots. How else would my customers know I had goods available if it weren’t for the Froot Loops decal on the side of my car. I think for my next project I’ll go with Shake N’ Bake on my cherry 87′ Delta 88.
What is a shame is that this guy will be set loose do do this same thing again. What many people fail to understand is that Driving is a “Privilege” and is subject to whatever restrictions or checks a State decides to place upon the Privilege. If this guy had not been transporting Illegal Drugs it would have been a simple stop. Check the Cars VIN, verify it and move on. I have to applaud anyone that is willing to be a Law Enforcement Officer because of issues like this. Car did not match the records and could have been stolen or a swapped tag. The Officers take them off the streets and the courts put them back out. Pitiful!!! And as far as I know, Law Enforcement does not need a reason to check a Tag.
Just to clear up some confusion in some of the comments, no suspicion, reasonable or otherwise, is needed to “run a tag”. A deputy can drive around and run tags all day long. Some agencies even have automatic “tag readers” that run EVERY tag. The tag doesn’t belong to you, it belongs to the state. It’s issued to your car, to identify your car.
So! The big lesion here is the deputy’s need to always just a better line for P.C!!!! Seatbelts and tag lights or no turn signals stuff like that… No need to worry this guy will be back on here soon..
15 years ago I was using my moms car to run some errands around town in Prattville, AL. I was going through a neighborhood and noticed two cop cars following me for around 5 minutes. I was not worried and had done nothing wrong that I knew of. I pulled up to a stop light and when it turned green I started to go. The cops behind me turned on their lights and I pulled over. Within a few seconds I had 4 unmarked cars and 3-4 marked cars surrounding me. They had guns drawn and were yelling at me to put my hands where they could see them. I was freaking out! One of the cops comes up to the car and started yelling at me saying “what color is the car you are driving”! I said GREEN, THE DAMN CAR IS GREEN! Then they talked amongst themselves for a few minutes then came to me and said “We are very sorry for the inconvenience, we thought the car was silver due to the sunlight reflecting off the car.” Then they all left and I was sitting in the car wondering if what just happened really happened. Cops are power hungry individuals and have little if no respect from me. I have never been to jail or arrested. Just an occasional speeding ticket here and there.
So a drug dealer gets off on a technicality?
So, would it follow that in the future if citizen Teamer was stopped because of a tag/registration description mismatch to color of his vehicle any further “evidence” would be expected to be suppressed even if he were transporting an unreported deceased individual or two.?
And we often question why there is lawlessness on the streets and in the halls of government…..Lord, Please Help Us.
I have mixed emotions on this one. For instance, a friend of mine was pulled over a few weeks ago by the escambia county sheriffs dept. Their excuse was, the tag on her car did not match her car. They kept her there for several minutes frightening her as she knew the tag on her car was the tag that belonged to her car. The officer was very intimidating. After several minutes, he told her that there had been a computer error and the tag, indeed belonged to her car. I wonder why they pulled over a 58 year old femail at 9:00 PM coming home from work only to tell her it was a computer glitch. As Danielle says above, why was my friend’s tag run if she was not speeding or breaking a law? She did not have any idea why she was pulled over. As Justice Quince states, just because you have a hunch someone is guilty, is wrong. Im not defending this guy, I am just saying, there are times ppl are harressed that are merely obeying the law. You try fighting a cop who trumps up charges cause he/she don’t like the way you look or even have a cop tell you he can target you in the future simply because he could not find something to charge you with. I believe in stopping all this drug-related crime however I am against simply harrassing a person cause you can.
There’s at least a dozen body shops in most towns that will paint your car a different color. It’s scary that doing so is suspicious enough to warrant a deputy running your tag.
Growing a beard or getting a haircut is something a criminal would do to disguise his appearance. Perhaps we should start detaining people who visit hair salons.
Don’t get me started on women with high heels and makeup….y’all are dangerous.
I’m not happy this guy is on the loose, but he’ll be back behind bars soon enough.
Reasonable doubt.
I’m with David, Wet Dog and No Excuses – I would like to know how the officer articulated his suspicion in his report and at trial. Surely, it wasn’t just “well the car was registered as blue, and it was actually a hideous metallic green.” It could have been many things, such as changing the color of the car because it was stolen. Nothing should be wrong with stopping a car to verify the registration matching the VIN on the car and admonishing the driver to get the DMV records updated.
Now, as to stopping someone walking in a sparsely occupied area at night, maybe the justices are unfamiliar with Terry v. Ohio, and the well known “Terry stop and frisk”.
Right out of Sudden Impact:
D’Ambrosia: When are you gonna learn, Harry? Sixth sense doesn’t count any more. You can’t bust suspects because you *think* they’re dirty. *Psychic* don’t *cut it*!
While I don’t agree with illegal search and seizures, what was wrong with this stop? The car had a tag that did not match the description of the car that it was supposed to be on. Tag switching is illegal. If I were a reasonable officer, I would have stopped him as well just to check it out. The rest happened because the guy was a CRIMINAL and was engaged in criminal activity. He was also found guilty during his trial. I can see why law enforcement gets so disgusted with our legal system. However, you win some, you lose some. We’ll see this guy’s face again, I’m sure.
Or, officers shouldn’t be quick to assume they know everything. If the vehicle wasn’t doing anything they should’ve never ran the tag to begin with. Its protect and serve not guess a d choose and then find a reason to justify. I. All for clean streets and life but we have to get it from both sides.
It is sad what are country has become.
Criminals have more rights than anyone.
Interesting to note, since the car color didn’t match the color associated with the license tag, it may have inferred that the tag was switched, indicating a felonious act, stealing of license plates, and switching to another vehicle. Do NOT make it easy for drug dealers to get out of jail!!!
OK, buy an out of state blue car and take it to the tag office to transfer the title. If the car is green, it will be inspected. Buy a pre 55 car with a # that says the car has a 6 cylinder motor and if they ask you and you tell them it has a V8 they will question you further and inspect the car. It’s happened to me several times. Had the person inspecting the vehicle smelled weed, I’m quite sure a deputy would have been called. So what’s the difference?
Actually, it looks like the search was due to a smell and the smell was due to the stop and the stop was due to a discrepancy and the discrepancy COULD have been due to criminal switching.
.
But the streets are now safer for drug runners and repainters.
If the car were purple with pink polka-dots, however …