Search & Seizure: Pants on the Ground and a Pistol in Your Pocket
State of Minnesota, Court of Appeals: Minnesota v. Wiggins
Not so long ago, we looked below the waist at a New York case of Pants on the Ground. In People v. Martinez, a Bronx Court said droopy drawers do not amount to disorderly conduct and a partial rear exposure does not offend public order or decency. Now Minnesota’s Court of Appeals takes a crack at the controversy.
The issue in Wiggins was this: When making a valid drug bust, did an officer unconstitutionally seize or search defendant Wiggins when she ordered him out of the car, made him raise his hands overhead, then gave him a “wardrobe assist” for his unexpected wardrobe malfunction (unlike Janet Jackson's) by pulling up his low-riding Levis from around his knees and finding what turned out to be a .380 caliber pistol in his pocket (which explained the sudden descent of defendant’s pants when he stood up)?
According to the court, “the officer reasonably ordered Wiggins to raise his hands and reasonably decided to adjust his excessively sagging pants. The adjustment did not constitute a search and was not conducted in a manner that raises any constitutional concerns.”
Here’s the brief story: The cops observed what looked like a buy and bust in a White Castle Parking lot on a main street. Wiggins was ordered out of the car and told to put his hands up. When his hands went up, his loose fitting jeans went down to his knees. Officer Breci was going to pat-frisk Wiggins but first pulled his pants up. In the process, she found the gun. He was charged with possession of a firearm but moved to suppress the weapon. His motion was dismissed and taken up on appeal.
Finding that the cop was “help[ing] him get his pants into a decent position,” the court ruled for the State. Although Wiggins was seized at the time he was ordered to raise his hands, he was not searched. Cops are permitted to do a limited pat-down search for their safety, but PO Breci never even got that far. Instead, it was an “accidental finding of a gun” during a wardrobe assist to keep defendant’s dignity in tack and his derrière from remaining on display.
Officer Breci was left with a Hobson’s choice. Pull up the pants and be accused of an illegal search and of inappropriate touching, or leave the pants at knee length and be put at risk of physical harm (if Wiggins went for the gun) and the accusation that Wiggins was “unreasonably humiliated” by the public exposure of his nether regions by cops intent on embarrassing him.
In this instance, the court found that pants on the ground are grounds for a wardrobe assist and the fruit of the wardrobe assist—the discovery of a pistol while defendant flashed his fruit of the looms—was reasonable.
Talk about getting caught with your pants down.
