23.08.2013 Views

In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of ...

In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of ...

In the Supreme Court of the United States In the Supreme Court of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />

ii<br />

Page<br />

Questions Presented .................................................................................................................... i<br />

Table <strong>of</strong> Authorities .................................................................................................................... v<br />

Opinions Below .......................................................................................................................... 1<br />

Constitutional Provisions and Statutes <strong>In</strong>volved ......................................................................... 1<br />

Statement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Case ................................................................................................................ 1<br />

Statement <strong>of</strong> Facts .......................................................................................................... 1<br />

Procedural History ......................................................................................................... 4<br />

Summary <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Argument ......................................................................................................... 4<br />

Standard <strong>of</strong> Review ................................................................................................................... 6<br />

Argument .................................................................................................................................. 7<br />

I. The Thirteenth Circuit correctly denied <strong>the</strong> Convict’s motion, as a matter <strong>of</strong><br />

law, because <strong>of</strong>ficers should be permitted to perform protective sweeps when<br />

<strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficer is legally on <strong>the</strong> premises and has reasonable suspicion <strong>of</strong> an<br />

unknown danger. ....................................................................................................... 7<br />

A. This <strong>Court</strong> should hold <strong>the</strong> Officer’s non-arrest protective sweep was<br />

permissible because Terry and its progeny allow <strong>of</strong>ficers to take safety<br />

measures when <strong>the</strong>re is reasonable suspicion <strong>of</strong> danger. ...................................... 8<br />

1. Terry’s <strong>of</strong>ficer safety logic encompasses non-arrest protective<br />

sweeps because <strong>the</strong> Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness standard<br />

permits <strong>of</strong>ficers to take reasonable safety measures. .................................... 9<br />

2. This <strong>Court</strong> should uphold <strong>the</strong> majority circuits’ broad construction <strong>of</strong><br />

Terry, Long, and Buie by upholding protective searches when<br />

<strong>of</strong>ficers reasonably suspect danger. ............................................................ 10<br />

3. The minority circuits incorrectly apply Buie because <strong>the</strong>y wrongly<br />

view Buie as an isolated justification for protective sweeps. ...................... 11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!