Cuff 'N Stuff
The Internal Newsletter of the Wise County Sheriff's
Department
02-23-01
|
Cuff 'N Stuff 02-23-01 |
|
Man Hides Methamphetamine in his . . . . A McMinnville, Tennessee man took disposing of evidence to new heights when he tried to swallow a plastic bag of drugs investigators found concealed in his rectum. The suspect, Darrell Felson Hobbs, 40, is charged with possession of methamphetamine and is being held at Warren County Jail awaiting a preliminary hearing. According to Sheriff Jackie Matheny, Hobbs was arrested on an outstanding warrant after his vehicle was pulled over by Deputy Sandy Hayes. During a subsequent body search prior to being placed behind bars, jailers noticed a bag hanging from his rectum. As the jailers retrieved the bag, they then noticed another one still lodged inside Hobb's rectum. Since jailers did not want to go in after the object (can you blame them?), Hobbs was asked to remove the evidence from his person but reportedly refused. Deputies then decided to take Hobbs to River Park Hospital where the object could be forcibly removed. However, before deputies could get Hobbs to the hospital, he reportedly pulled the bag from his rectum and placed it in his mouth. Officers then took Hobbs to the hospital to have his stomach pumped, believing he had swallowed the bag of drugs. Sheriff Matheny said Hobbs spit the bag out of his mouth enroute to the hospital but deputies still had his stomach pumped. The Sheriff said about five grams of meth were contained in the two bags. Hobbs reportedly has a history of meth arrests. Copyright ©2000 Dumb Crooks
From the Chief Deputy—Police Deaths Rise in 2000 We were blessed here at Wise County Sheriff’s Dept. this year. When you consider the number of officers we have per square mile and per 1,000 population, our limited resources, the increased vehicular traffic and overloaded roadways, our close proximity to the DFW Metro Area and the personnel turn over in patrol. It has been a good year. When you read the article included below remember that the Texas Officer Fatalities for 2000 were about a 60-40 split on rural versus urban Fatalities. Police Deaths Rise in 2000 More than 150 law enforcement officers across the nation were killed in the line of duty during 2000, representing more than 10 percent rise in police fatalities over the previous year. There were 151 federal, state and local law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty during the past year, according to preliminary figures released today by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund (NLEOMF) and the Concerns of Police Survivors (COPS). That is 13 percent higher than the 134 officers who made the ultimate sacrifice in 1999. Of the 151 officers who were killed during the past year, 51 were shot to death, 47 died in automobile accidents; 20 were struck by automobiles while outside of their own vehicles; eight died in motorcycle accidents; seven were killed in aircraft accidents; six succumbed to job-related illnesses; three drowned; three died in falls; two were stabbed; one died in a bicycle accident ; one officer was killed in an accident involving a horse; one was beaten to death; and one officer died in a bomb-related incident. Texas was the deadliest state in the nation over the past year for police officers with 15 fatalities; followed by California with 11; and Georgia and Tennessee with 10 each. Six of the officers killed during the past year were women. “Despite improved equipment and better training, law enforcement remains the deadliest profession in America,” declared NLEOMF Chairman Craig W. Floyd. On average, he noted, one police officer is killed somewhere in our country every 57 hours. There are also 62,000 assaults committed against our officers every year, resulting in more than 21,000 injuries. Dating back to the first law enforcement fatality in 1792, more than 15,000 officers have lost their lives in the line of duty. “The sacrifices made by our police officers, and their families, are too often taken for granted,” observed COPS National President Molly Winters.. “Not a day goes by that an officer does not risk his or her life for the safety and protection of others.” A case in point would be during Christmas when we had all the icy roads and the Texas “7” were headed to Colorado. US287/81 is used more than any other roadway as the route of choice from DFW area to Colorado. Theoretically, any Deputy, Trooper, PD officer working US287/81 during that time period could have stopped to check the welfare of the occupants of a vehicle in the median or the roadside and have encountered the Texas “7” by themselves. So folks we are faced with meeting another year and it is an absolute
imperative that we keep that “EDGE”. No matter what the job assignment is we
must be ever vigilant against becoming complacent, disinterested or pre-occupied
in our duties.
Legal Issues - Search and Seizure CONTINUED DETENTION FOLLOWING TRAFFIC STOP SUPPORTED BY REASONABLE SUSPICION. An officer noticed that the tail light was burned out on the defendant’s car. As the officer stopped the defendant, the man immediately got out of his car, put his keys in his pocket, and walked toward the officer’s car. The defendant appeared nervous and was shaking as he handed the officer his driver’s license and insurance card. As they waited for the dispatcher to complete a license check, the officer asked the defendant questions about his trip and where he was employed. The defendant’s responses to the officer’s questions were “blurted” out, and he seemed unsure of his responses. The man also told the officer that he had once been arrested for theft. The officer informed the defendant that if his license check was clear, he would be given a warning citation for the defective tail lamp. No warrants were outstanding, and the license was valid, but the defendant’s criminal history included charges for aggravated battery and aggravated burglary. The officer then asked whether the defendant had anything illegal in his car, and the man replied that he did not. When asked if he would consent to a search of “everything within the vehicle,” the defendant started walking away from the officer. When asked again if he would consent, the defendant nodded his head. Inside the spare tire in the defendant’s trunk, the officer found a duct-taped box containing more than 400 grams of cocaine. The defendant was charged with possession with intent to deliver, and he moved to suppress the drugs. The defendant argued that his continued detention following the initial traffic stop was not based on reasonable suspicion; that any consent was not given voluntarily; and that the search of the spare tire exceeded the scope of consent given by the defendant. Holding: “To be reasonable, a traffic stop must be temporary and last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop.” An officer may request certain information during the stop, but once the reason for the stop is achieved, any continued detention must be based on reasonable suspicion or probably cause. Reasonable suspicion requires articulable facts showing that “something out of the ordinary” is occurring which is “related to crime.” This level of suspicion is based on “commonsense judgments and inferences about human behavior.” Because of the officer’s experience stopping motorists at night, he found it suspicious that the defendant got out of his car and approached the patrol car as soon as he was stopped. The driver’s nervousness and the way he answered questions contributed to the officer’s suspicion. When the officer discovered that the defendant had not been truthful about his criminal history, he became more suspicious that the defendant had some reason not to tell the truth. All of these factors taken together and combined with “commonsense inferences about human behavior,” suggested that the driver was trying to divert attention from his car and his prior criminal record. Based on the circumstances the officer had reasonable suspicion to think that the defendant’s car might contain contraband. Continuing the detention of the defendant was justified. When the officer asked for consent to search the vehicle, the defendant nodded in assent, something he was seen doing when the videotape of the stop was reviewed. While the defendant suggested that his nod was in response to a previous question, and not a sign that he consented, the trial judge’s finding that the nod indicated consent was supported by the evidence. When the officer requested consent for a search “of the car,” a reasonable person would have interpreted the scope of the consent to include all areas of the vehicle. The officer’s question about whether there were guns, drugs, or contraband in the car asked just before the request for consent was made, indicated to the defendant what the object of the search was. A reasonable person would have known his consent was for a search of any areas of the vehicle that could contain the objects the officer asked about. Consequently, the consent given by the defendant was affirmative and voluntarily given, and the search of the spare tire within the trunk did not exceed the scope of the consent. Simpson v. State, 29 S.W.3rd 324 (Tex.App.-Houston 2000).
Lord, Help Us Realize That When We Are Dog Tired By Nightfall, Maybe It’s From Growling All Day.
IS IT TRUE? IS IT KIND? DOES IT HELP ANYONE? The television show “60 Minutes” once interviewed a group of people who were buying some of the “sensational” weekly magazines. They were asked if they really believed what they read. Most of them said no, but they liked to read it, anyway! It seems to be human nature to enjoy such things. We find so many occasions to “share information.” If it is spoken in a whisper, the chances are it shouldn’t be spoken at all; and if we hesitate to say something, there is probably a good reason. There is a story about a man who spread gossip and really hurt the person whose story it was. He asked for forgiveness. He was given some feathers and told to put them on the doorstep of those he had told. Then he was told to pick them up again. Of course, the wind had blown them away and it was impossible. It is just as impossible to take back hurtful words. So, ask yourself. Is it true? Is it kind? Does it help anyone? |
|
Crime Does Not Have To Be A Fact Of Life |
