United States v. Clay

Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 98-1564

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

JACKIE CLAY,

Defendant, Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. Robert E. Keeton, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Selya, Circuit Judge,

Aldrich and Campbell, Senior Circuit Judges.

David Duncan, with whom Zalkind, Rodriguez, Lunt & Duncan was on brief, for appellant. Marianne C. Hinkle, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, was on brief, for the United States.

November 10, 1998

Per Curiam. This is a single-issue criminal appeal in which the defendant argues that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the taxicab in which he was traveling. The proper inquiry is fact-contingent, and an inquiring court must consider the totality of the relevant circumstances. See United States v. Stanley, 915 F.2d 54, 55 (1st Cir. 1990). Viewing the circumstances here extant as a whole, through the eyes of reasonable, yet experienced, police officers, see United States v. Trullo, 809 F.2d 108, 112 (1st Cir. 1987), we have no doubt but that the police had a sufficient basis reasonably to suspect that the cab contained the individual who had attempted to commit the crime. See United States v. Kimball, 25 F.3d 1, 6 (1st Cir. 1994). Consequently, the minimal intrusion that the stop entailed was fully justified. See id.

We need go no further. The judgment below will be

Affirmed.