State v. Lagarde

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Lagarde

778 So. 2d 585, 2001 La. LEXIS 431, 2001 WL 118557

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedFebruary 9, 2001

DocketNo. 2000-K-1238

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 778 So. 2d 585 (State v. Lagarde) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Lagarde, 778 So. 2d 585, 2001 La. LEXIS 431, 2001 WL 118557 (La. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

*

Granted. The rulings below on the motion to suppress are reversed, relator’s conditional guilty plea under State v. Crosby, 338 So.2d 584 (La.1976), is vacated, and this case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings. Even assuming that the police had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop and to conduct a self-protective frisk for weapons, see United States v. Trullo, 809 F.2d 108, 113— 14 (1st Cir.1987), the search of the cigarette pack which the defendant had voluntarily removed from his pocket, leading to the discovery of a crack-pipe, exceeded the permissible scope of the pat-down frisk sanctioned by Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), and “amounted to the sort of evidentiary search that Terry expressly refused to authorize .... ” Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 378, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 2139, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993). See State v. James, 99-3304 (La.12/8/00), — So.2d-, 2000 WL 1821204; State v. Sheehan, 99-0725 (La.7/2/99), 767 So.2d 1; State v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 173 (La.App. 4th Cir.1993), unit denied, 93-2109 (La.9/23/94), 642 So.2d 1307.

TRAYLOR and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the writ.

James C. Gulotta, Justice Pro Tempore, sitting for Associate Justice Harry T. Lemmon.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

*

Granted. The rulings below on the motion to suppress are reversed, relator’s conditional guilty plea under State v. Crosby, 338 So.2d 584 (La.1976), is vacated, and this case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings. Even assuming that the police had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop and to conduct a self-protective frisk for weapons, see United States v. Trullo, 809 F.2d 108, 113— 14 (1st Cir.1987), the search of the cigarette pack which the defendant had voluntarily removed from his pocket, leading to the discovery of a crack-pipe, exceeded the permissible scope of the pat-down frisk sanctioned by Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), and “amounted to the sort of evidentiary search that Terry expressly refused to authorize .... ” Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 378, 113 S.Ct. 2130, 2139, 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993). See State v. James, 99-3304 (La.12/8/00), — So.2d-, 2000 WL 1821204; State v. Sheehan, 99-0725 (La.7/2/99), 767 So.2d 1; State v. Thornton, 621 So.2d 173 (La.App. 4th Cir.1993), unit denied, 93-2109 (La.9/23/94), 642 So.2d 1307.

TRAYLOR and KNOLL, JJ., would deny the writ.

James C. Gulotta, Justice Pro Tempore, sitting for Associate Justice Harry T. Lemmon.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

778 So. 2d 585, 2001 La. LEXIS 431, 2001 WL 118557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lagarde-la-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack