Connecticut Court Says Cops Can Detain You For Being Near Someone That's Getting Arrested

Connecticut cops can detain citizens for no other reason than the suspicion they hold for another person, all in the name of "officer safety." According to a recent ruling from the state's highest court, if you are in a public place with a person who the cops want to arrest, they can detain you also—even if they have no reason to suspect you of doing anything wrong. On its face the ruling is not all that grandiose, but in a passionately written dissenting opinion Justice Eveleigh explains why this verdict tramples on citizens' Fourth Amendment rights:
I agree with the majority that the police have a legitimate interest in protecting themselves. There must be, however, some restrictions placed on the intent. In my view, there are several potential unconscionable ramifications to the majority opinion. For instance, if a suspect with an outstanding warrant is talking to his neighbor's family near the property line, can the police now detain the entire family as part of the encounter with the suspect? If the suspect is waiting at a bus stop with six other strangers, can they all be detained?
If the same suspect is observed leaving a house and stopped in the front yard, can the police now seize everyone in the house to ensure that no one will shoot them while they question the suspect? What if the suspect is detained in a neighborhood known to have a high incident of crime, can the police now seize everyone in the entire neighborhood to ensure their safety while they detain the suspect? There simply is no definition of who is a ''companion'' in the majority opinion. I would require more than mere ''guilt by association.'' Ever mindful of Franklin's admonition, we cannot use the omnipresent specter of safety as a guise to authorize government intrusion.
As Techdirt.com notes, such expanded power for the police could allow them to "use spurious reasons to detain people they just don't want around—like eyewitnesses and photographers."
The verdict comes from the case State of Connecticut v. Jeremy Kelly, where the defendant was seeking to have evidence thrown out of his trial because he claims that he was unlawfully detained by police and, therefore, his fourth amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure was violated.
In 2007, Kelly was walking alongside another man into a driveway when two undercover officers determined that his walking companion fit the description of a guy they were looking for who had violated his probation. The officers stopped their car in front of the driveway, one of them displayed a badge and said, "I'm a police officer." The officer then told both men to come over to the vehicle, even though the cops at that point in time really only had a particular interest in one of the men.
Both men did not comply with the officer's command and attempted to run away. The cops eventually caught up with the two of them and that is when they discovered Kelly was carrying cocaine.
So, he got nine years in prison. And the man that he was with? He wasn't the guy police were looking for.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
First, kill all the lawyers.
Technically, the lawyers are some of the most guilty under the definition.
They always have all manner of suspects running in and out of their place of business. DA's especially.
After we kill all the cops, judges, and prosecutors.
He got nine years for some cocaine possession? Fuck.
BAM, you are subject to arrest from the grammar police
Holy fuck, wow just wow.
I thought this was already the case? For example, if you are a witness to a felony are you not supposed to stay until the police have already obtained contact information for you to testify?
No.
There's no automatic legal obligation to report a crime, nor to allow yourself to be identified as a witness.
You can be compelled to testify with a subpoena - *if* you are identified.
And this isn't about being a witness.
You're best buddy could be wanted for not paying child support. Walk down the street with him in CT and you too may end up being arrested 'just in case'.
why this verdict tramples on citizens' Fourth Amendment rights
Fourth? Not First or both?
Unless I'm missing it, you failed to point out the other "fun" part of this case, which is the guy he was walking with when he was searched, the one the police were seeking to arrest, wasn't even the person the police were looking for in the first place.