Cohen v. Anderson Heating Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that protective sweep was not invalidated by fact that appellant was secured in patrol vehicle at time of search because appellant would have been allowed to return to vehicle at end of investigative detention
• finding that police were permitted to ensure that suspect would not be able to gain access to a weapon in his vehicle upon return to his car after the close of investigative detention
• holding sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify protective weapons sweep where traffic stop took place at night, in a high crime area, and police observed defendant make a furtive movement
• explaining “[w]here a person performs an activity that is indicative of an attempt to secrete a weapon, that movement, regardless of whether it is singular or multiple, can support a belief that the person has a gun”
• explaining: “[w]here a person performs an activity that is indicative of an attempt to [hide] a weapon, that movement, regardless of whether it is singular or multiple, can support a belief that the person has a gun”
• even one motion by person indicative of attempt to secret weapon can support belief that person has gun and justifies search of center console based on fear weapon night be located there

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).