U.S. Supreme Court rejects Lehigh County’s appeal in concealed weapon case

[Swordsmyth]

The U.S. Supreme Court this week declined to hear an appeal by Lehigh County prosecutors, leaving in place a state court ruling that police can’t detain a person merely for carrying a gun.
The high court on Monday rejected a request by the Lehigh County District Attorney’s Office to review a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision throwing out its case against a man stopped by Allentown police after a camera operator spotted him tucking a revolver in his waistband outside a gas station.

Michael J. Hicks, who was licensed to carry the gun, wasn’t charged with a weapons offense, but he was convicted of drunken driving as a result of his June 28, 2014, encounter with police. The May decision by Pennsylvania justices overturned a longstanding legal doctrine that an officer’s knowledge of a concealed weapon was a sufficient basis for reasonable suspicion to detain a person and investigate whether they have a license to conceal.

(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com (https://www.mcall.com/news/police/mc-nws-lehigh-county-hicks-supreme-court-denied-20191212-6q62g2uinna7xohblsy4teeyym-story.html) ...

[angelatc]

“When many people are licensed to do something, and violate no law by doing that thing, common sense dictates that the police officer cannot assume that any given person doing it is breaking the law,” Justice David Wecht wrote in the court’s lead opinion.

The U.S. Supreme Court gave no explanation for denying the district attorney’s petition to appeal. Its decision means the state Supreme Court case will remain the law in Pennsylvania.

Heather Gallagher, chief deputy district attorney, called it a concerning decision.

“I think that it certainly implicates public safety. It makes law enforcement’s job in some ways more difficult,” Gallagher said.

[More News] Judge: Soldier boyfriend’s psychological profile fair game in Jamie Silvonek’s bid to overturn murder conviction »
Deputy public defender Kathryn Smith, who represented Hicks, did not return a call Thursday.

In a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, the district attorney’s office argued that Pennsylvania Supreme Court ignored the high court’s standard of review for search and seizure cases that instructs judges to consider the “totality of the circumstances” through the eyes of the police officer.

The district attorney’s office argued the Pennsylvania Supreme Court gave no weight to the fact that the officers observed Hicks conceal the gun in his pants at 2:45 a.m. in a high-crime area known for drug trafficking and violent crime.

The office was also critical of the court’s comparison of carrying a concealed weapon to driving a car, reasoning that just as police cannot determine that someone driving a car is unlicensed, they cannot determine whether someone concealing a gun is doing so without a license.

What a stupid analogy. They're not allowed to pull you over simply to see if you have a license, either.