Can the Police Arrest You Based on an Inaccurate Witness Description?

Police officers often rely on citizen reports of criminal or “suspicious” activity. In many cases, the police use the reports to issue a BOLO, or a “be on the lookout” bulletin. A BOLO need not identify a specific individual or suspect. Instead, a BOLO may simply offer a description of a suspicious person based on a citizen informant’s report.

Florida Appeals Court Reverses Motion to Suppress in Juvenile Burglary Case

Unfortunately, even when a BOLO contains a less-than-accurate description, it can still form the lawful basis for an arrest. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal recently addressed such a case. In State v. L.C., prosecutors filed a delinquency petition based on a juvenile’s alleged participation in an attempted burglary.

The case began when a police officer received a BOLO dispatch identifying four Black males with shorts–and not wearing shirts–breaking into a vehicle. A few minutes later, the officer saw four males running near the site of the alleged burglary. The officer proceeded to detain the four men. Two of the men, including the juvenile in this case, actually were wearing shirts, contrary to the BOLO description. Additionally, the juvenile was mixed race and identified by the officer as “white” as opposed to Black.

Another officer brought the informant to the scene where the four males were detained. The informant identified the juvenile as the one who “walked up to the vehicle, the car door and pulled on it.” As previously noted, this led to the state charging the juvenile with attempted burglary.

The trial court granted the defense’s motion to suppress all evidence gathered by law enforcement as the result of an illegal stop. Essentially, the defense maintained that the juvenile did not match the description in the BOLO, and therefore the officer lacked a basis to detain him. The trial court agreed and granted the motion to suppress.

The Second District reversed, however, and returned the case for trial. The appellate court dismissed the inconsistencies between the BOLO and the juvenile’s actual appearance–he was a mixed race male wearing a shirt versus a shirtless black male–as effectively irrelevant. Looking at the “totality of the circumstances,” the Second District concluded the officer had a “reasonable suspicion” to detail the juvenile.

Contact AsiliA Law Firm Today

It is important to remember that “reasonable suspicion” is the standard police must meet to stop and detain someone as part of an investigation. An actual arrest requires “probable cause,” which is a higher standard of proof. And a criminal conviction requires proof of a defendant’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

So even if the police detain or arrest you, that is no guarantee of a conviction. A qualified Miami burglary attorney can review the state’s case against you and advise you of any potential weaknesses, as well as assist you in preparing a vigorous defense. Call AsiliA Law Firm today at 786-420-3014 or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation.

Source:

2dca.flcourts.gov/content/download/2442011/opinion/Opinion_2023-0634.pdf