Here’s some free legal advice. If you don’t have a gun license (and even if you do) avoid posting videos of yourself on social media with a firearm.
The cops know how to use Instagram and you’d be amazed how many people they arrest based on ill-advised posts.
Consider a slip opinion issued today by the Appeals Court.
According to court documents, Markell Mitchell and his friend allegedly posted a livestream video on Instagram showing them smoking pot in the stairwell of a multiunit home.
Members of Springfield’s firearms investigation unit watched the video and observed what looked like a handgun in the friend’s pocket.
The man, who had a history of firearm offenses and no license to carry, was well known to the police.
Investigators went to the scene and reportedly saw both men getting into an Audi sedan outside the housing complex.
At this point, officers observed “a heavy, concealed object in [Mitchell’s] sweatshirt pocket or waistband.”
Based on their observations, the police stopped the Audi, searched the men, and ultimately charged Mitchell with unlawful possession of a firearm.
His attorney sought to suppress the firearm, claiming that the police did not have “reasonable suspicion” to stop the car.
A superior court judge denied the motion and Mitchell’s lawyer appealed.
Today the Appeals Court upheld the judge’s decision.
Based upon the totality of several circumstances presented by this evidence before the motion judge (who fully credited the testimony of the police witnesses), we conclude that the police properly stopped the car. First, police recognition of distinctive firearm features observed on the computer monitor’s livestream video provided not just a reasonable suspicion, but probable cause to believe that [Mitchell’s friend] concealed an unholstered firearm in his clothing. Second, additional observations, noting the difference between the defendant’s appearance in the livestream video (without any indication of a firearm) and his appearance emerging from the home minutes later (clutching a heavy object in his sweatshirt pocket or waistband), provided a reasonable suspicion that the defendant acquired possession of the firearm from [his friend] within the confined quarters of the stairwell once the livestream ended. The concept of reasonable suspicion allows for such logical inferences and does not require the police to see the firearm handed to the defendant. Third, the police knew from a record check that the defendant lacked a license to carry a firearm. Thus, the sequence of circumstances observed by police officers in constant communication during a joint and continuous investigation provided the requisite specific and articulable facts and rational inferences from those facts justifying the stop of the defendant. (Citations and quotations omitted.)
The full text of the slip opinion is attached below.