A Greyhound bus employee called the police and reported that a man at the bus station had fallen asleep on a bench with a handgun falling out of his pocket. Greyhound did not allow individuals to carry concealed firearms at the bus station. Police officers arrived at the bus station, which was located in a high crime area, and removed a handgun that was hanging from the sleeping man’s pocket. The officers woke the man up and placed him in handcuffs. The officers learned the man, later identified as Harris, had an outstanding warrant for his arrest. The officers arrested Harris on the outstanding warrant and the government later charged him for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
Harris argued the police officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights because they did
…show more content…
As a result, Harris claimed the officers had no right to remove the handgun from his pocket and place him in handcuffs.
The court disagreed. While the court stated the government struggled to show the police officers had a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, the officers were allowed to remove the handgun from Harris’ pocket under the community caretaking doctrine which basically lets the police arrest a convicted felon with a gun. The community caretaking doctrine justifies the actions conducted by police officers that were not involved in the investigation of criminal activity or the seizure of criminal evidence. A police officer may act under the community caretaking doctrine when the officer has a reasonable belief that an emergency exists requiring his attention. In