Does Agent Sandoval have reasonable suspicion to detain defendant?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Santos-Garcia, G050941 (Cal. App. 2016):
Agent Sandoval did not have reasonable suspicion to detain defendant. He had a hunch. His hunch turned out to be correct, but the law is clear that "officers are not entitled to rely on mere hunches." (People v. Hernandez, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 299.) Accordingly, the court erred in denying defendant's motion to suppress.
The judgment is reversed.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Are detentions based on reasonable suspicion or reasonable suspicion lawful? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court abused its discretion to treat Defendant as a "defendant" in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant's reasonableness of their conduct is reasonable? (California, United States of America)
Does Defendant have a valid claim to be able to claim damages from a defendant who has been found guilty of a similar claim against the Defendant? (California, United States of America)
Is there any reason why a jury convicted a defendant of murder by reason of premeditation rather than felony? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant can reasonably have reasonably anticipated the events leading up to the action? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for making a Defendant pay a Defendant's unlawful detainer? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a reasonable trier of fact could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
