U.S. v. Holly

In prosecution on charge of unlawful possession of firearm, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress seizure of his gun during on-street encounter with police, even though defendant argued that police officer violated his 4th Amendment rights, when: (1) officer rushed up to approach him on street and asked him if he had gun; and (2) he was arrested after he told officer that he had gun. While defendant argued his encounter with officer amounted to impermissible seizure, Dist. Ct. could properly believe officer’s testimony that encounter was voluntary, where officer spoke to defendant in public and never stopped him on street, obstructed him from walking on sidewalk, or make any show of force at time officer posed question to defendant. Moreover, police do not violate 4th Amendment by merely approaching person in public and asking him questions. Also, plaintiff failed to establish viable due process claim arising out of police failure to preserve video of instant encounter, where: (1) defendant’s claim was only that police failed to preserve potentially useful evidence, which required showing of bad faith; and (2) plaintiff failed to make such showing where police made unsuccessful attempt to preserve said video, and where testimony indicated that lost video did not depict defendant’s arrest.