In re DM
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
566 Pa. 445, 781 A.2d 1161 (2001)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
A police officer received an anonymous tip that a Black male wearing blue jeans, a white T-shirt, and white sneakers was one block away and holding a gun. The officer went to the site and saw DM (defendant), a juvenile who matched the description. The officer called out to DM, but DM tried to flee. Another police officer stopped DM. The police then frisked DM and found a gun on him. DM moved to suppress the gun, arguing that the police officers had lacked reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk him. The trial court denied the motion, and DM was sentenced. On appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that unprovoked flight was not relevant to a reasonable-suspicion determination and, therefore, that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop DM. However, the United States Supreme Court then issued a new decision holding that unprovoked flight in a high-crime area created reasonable suspicion to stop and frisk a suspect. The United States Supreme Court remanded DM’s case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for additional review under the new caselaw.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cappy, J.)
Dissent (Zappala, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.