Los Angeles Arrest: Suspicious is not Enough
In Remers v. Sup. Court, the California Supreme Court said that suspicion—even in a so-called “high drug area”—does not equal probable cause.
For anyone having a criminal case in Los Angeles (such as gun or drugs cases), this case is a reminder that police cannot bootstrap weak facts into a lawful arrest. Los Angeles Criminal defense attorneys can use this case to win a criminal case by suppressing the evidence under Penal Code § 1538.5.
The Facts:
In Remers, officers observed a woman outside a pizza parlor in Berkeley:
- She looked over her shoulders.
- She removed a tinfoil package from her purse.
- She nodded to a man and walked inside.
- Officers believed “a deal was going down.”
They approached her, reached into her purse, and removed the tinfoil package. Inside were Seconal tablets. She was arrested for possession with the intent to sell narcotics.
Her criminal defense attorney filed a motion to suppress the evidence based on illegal search and seizure in violation of 4th amendment to the US Constitution (in California, it is known as a PC 1538.5 motion).
At the hearing, the prosecution argued:
- The area had a reputation for drug activity.
- Drugs are often packaged in tinfoil.
- Officers had heard she previously sold drugs.
- She had a prior arrest for drug-related charges.
The Superior Court (trial court) denied the motion, but the Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court’s holding and granted the motion.
The Legal Standard: Probable Cause!
The Supreme Court reaffirmed the probable cause requirement:
Specific and articulable facts that would lead a person of ordinary prudence to believe a crime is being committed.
Not a hunch.
Not a reputation.
Not a guess.
If conduct is as consistent with innocent activity as with criminal activity, detention or arrest is unlawful.
Why the Arrest of Remers Was Invalid
A Tinfoil Package Is Not Suspicious by Itself
The Court emphasized:
- Many legitimate items (food, tobacco, etc.) are wrapped in tinfoil.
- Even the officer admitted it could have contained cookies.
- Packaging alone does not create probable cause.
In Los Angeles criminal cases today, this principle is crucial. Officers often rely on:
- Small plastic baggies
- Foil wrapping
- Cash in small denominations
- “Hand-to-hand” movements
But unless there are additional concrete facts, packaging alone is not enough.
“High Crime Area” Does Not Lower Constitutional Protections
The officers relied on the fact that the location was known for drug activity.
The Court warned that allowing this to justify arrests would:
- Erode Fourth Amendment protections
- Encourage police harassment
- Create resentment in communities
In Los Angeles—especially in neighborhoods labeled “high crime areas”—this argument is still frequently used. But Remers makes clear that location alone does not allow the police to do searches.
Police Cannot Rely on Unverified Rumors About Prior Activity
One officer claimed he had heard from other officers that the defendant was selling drugs. However:
- No source was identified.
- No evidence was presented to verify the claim.
- The prior arrest had been dismissed.
- No drugs had actually been found on her in the prior case.
The Court ruled that officers cannot manufacture probable cause through:
- Internal police rumors
- Unverified “rap sheet” entries
- Dismissed or unfounded arrests
Allowing that would turn previously arrested individuals into:
“Second class citizens, with lesser rights than other citizens.”
This language remains powerful in suppression litigation.
Remers is Important for Criminal Cases in Los Angeles
As a Criminal Defense Attorney in Los Angeles, I frequently see cases where arrests are based on:
- “Nervous behavior”
- Furtive movement
- Looking around
- Brief hand movements
- Small packaging
- Anonymous tips
- Prior police contact
This case provides strong authority to challenge:
- Warrantless purse searches
- Warrantless vehicle searches
- Street detentions escalating into arrests
- Evidence seized after unlawful detentions
If the officer cannot point to specific, articulable facts that clearly indicate criminal conduct, the evidence may be suppressed.
Dismissing Criminal Cases: Motio Under Penal Code § 1538.5
When police violate the Fourth Amendment:
- Evidence must be excluded.
- That includes contraband, guns, drugs, statements, and derivative evidence.
- In Remer’s case, without the drugs, possession-for-sale cases collapse; but the same is true for any case where police search results in contraband.
As a criminal defense attorney, I will prepare and argue a motion to suppress that can:
- Lead to dismissal or
- Result in reduced charges or
- Strengthen negotiation leverage
Criminal Defense Attorney Approach:
When analyzing a criminal case in Los Angeles, key questions include:
- Did officers actually see contraband?
- Was there an exchange of identifiable items?
- Was the packaging like?
- Did the officer rely on departmental rumors?
- Was the area labeled “high crime” without more?
- Was the prior arrest dismissed?
Conclusion
The Court emphasized that the exclusionary rule exists to deter unlawful police conduct. Allowing officers to rely on weak or manufactured grounds would:
- Incentivize repeated harassment
- Justify arrests on flimsy suspicion
- Undermine Fourth Amendment protections
Remers v. Superior Court remains a cornerstone of California search-and-seizure law. It stands for a simple but powerful idea:
Suspicion is not probable cause.
If you or a loved one has been arrested for a felony or misdemeanor in Los Angeles, call a Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney to challenge the legality of the police stop or of the search. Many cases can be dismissed when the police search is not justified.
As a Criminal Defense Attorney in Los Angeles, I regularly litigate suppression motions under Penal Code § 1538.5 and challenge unlawful searches and arrests. Protecting constitutional rights at the earliest stage often makes the difference between conviction and dismissal.
If you are facing a criminal case in Los Angeles, consult an experienced Los Angeles-based lawyer immediately.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...
Leave a Reply