Furtive Movements at Time of Apprehension Enough to Keep Suspects Cuffed

At police stop for a suspected drug deal, officers were allowed to cuff the suspects as they waited for a canine unit because of possible safety implications by the suspect’s actions around the car

Chase v. State, 2016 BL 269343, Md., No. 85, 8/19/16.

   The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed a denial for a motion to suppress evidence collected while officer cuffed two suspects for safety reasons after a drug deal sting. When the officers approached the vehicle where the drug deal occurred, they noticed “furtive” movements made by the suspects and feared that they may have had weapons on them or in the vehicle. They were cuffed for approximately two minutes while the arresting officers waited for a canine unit to arrive to search the vehicle.

   The court upheld the trial court’s decision, ruling that the handcuffing of the suspects in this instance did not necessarily transform the detention into an arrest due to the totality of the circumstances. The court took into account the possibility of weapons in the vehicle and the furtive movements and mannerisms of the suspects. The officers, even after performing a frisk of the suspects and finding no weapons were ruled to be justified in handcuffing the suspects because of the fear of weapons in the vehicle.

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Chase_v_State_No_85_2016_BL_269343_Md_Aug_19_2016_Court_Opinion.