Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Reynolds v. Commonwealth

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided November 9, 2012No. 2010-CA-002192-MRPublished

1ConcurrenceKeller, Judge

I concur in result only, because I believe that Reynolds was improperly seized.

Having carefully reviewed the July 22, 2010, suppression hearing, I set forth the relevant testimony below. Officer Michael *614Geis (Officer Geis) testified to the following. Around midnight on May 11, 2010, someone from Walgreens notified the Florence Police Department that two women had been in the store, that they were talking loudly and acting strangely, and had purchased legal quantities of pseu-doephedrine.3 There were also some other females involved that purchased pseu-doephedrine.4 The police were told that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Baltimore v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2003
  4. Henson v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Nichols v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2005

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API