Can an Inference of Criminal Activity form the basis of a stop?

The Appeals Court of Massachusetts ruled that probable cause for motor vehicle stop could be based upon an inference of criminal activity.  Specifically, in Commonwealth v. Sanders, the Appeals Court determined that an experienced narcotics officer had probable cause to search and arrest a suspected drug dealer attempting to leave the scene of a “car meet’ even though the officer did not observe an actual exchange between the parties or furtive movements suggesting criminal activity.

The law of search and seizure has always been clear that a mere hunch of criminal activity is insufficient to form the basis of probable cause for a stop, but according to this decision, an inference enough.  Previously, there were a myriad of factors applied to each individual factual analysis that would assist the court in making a determination of whether probable cause existed.  Those factors, outlined in the case of Commonwealth v. Santaliz, were (1) the observation of an unusual transaction; (2) furtive actions by those involved in the transaction; (3) the occurrence of the activity in a location known for drug activity; and (4) the experience of the officer.

The Appeals Court in Sanders reinforced a previous court opinion in Commonwealth v. Stewart requiring that an officer’s observations “provide factual support for the inference that the parties exchanged an object.”  To that end, in Sanders the court found that the inference of a transaction was bolstered by the defendant as a known drug dealer.

If you have been arrested for possession, distribution or trafficking of a controlled substance, contact the Law Office of Kristen F. Bonavita for a free consultation at 978-376-6746.