ÿWPCd  ncQ0S á®J^±=?¶ ¾D .l#ÑCK`ã!ºr9w+!òM(¼((¢PŒ—»Aïdÿ&ç¬]UÂÅÒr[ ¼ü*Gg8< ¶õhùóì‘‹¾¯\ˆ)@8 0Dvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvbºººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººººº 0ë B­­ 0¤Ê D3n D-¡ 0KÎÎ ASÆl 0¤2 0DÖ A« AŸÅ»Fru-s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo†)€G€yD€°‡¦3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(¦ÙCEMU]emu}AutoList1(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à ô\  `&Times New Roman(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2ß$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¸…ò»»Ô d(|3~$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3~$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKX[Z‘ I&mage <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€í»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼í»»»ÔÑ8€\aXXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îüíÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼í»îîü#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJuly€9,€2002€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔÌò òÔ#†¼í»XX\a #ÔSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóó€v.€Ô_ÔLILLIEÔ_Ô€FRAN€FERGUSONòòóóÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Madison€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€99„938€€€€€€Roger€A.€Page,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2002„00638„CCA„R3„CD€€Ô_Ô„Ô_Ô€Filed€November€19,€Ô_Ô2002Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓAfter€entering€a€guilty€plea,€the€defendant€reserved€certified€questions€for€review:€(1)€whether€theÐ xÈ  ÐòòTerryóó€search€was€justified,€and€(2)€whether€the€incriminating€nature€of€the€contraband€wasÐ d´ Ðimmediately€apparent.€€We€hold€that€the€officer€lacked€reasonable€suspicion€to€justify€a€òòTerryóó€friskÐ P  Ðand€that€the€object€felt€was€not€immediately€apparent€as€contraband.€€We€reverse€and€dismiss€theÐ <Œ Ðdefendantððs€conviction.Ð (x ÐÓÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Reversed€andÐ P ÐDismissedó óÐ ì< ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼í»àX\a¼#ÔÔ‡X\aX.¼íÔJohn€Everett€Williams,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòNorma€McGee€Ogleóó€andÐ Ä ÐòòAlan€E.€Glenn,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ° ÐÌLloyd€R.€Ô_ÔTatumÔ_Ô,€Henderson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Ô_ÔLillieÔ_Ô€Fran€Ferguson.Ð ˆØ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€John€H.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð `° ÐJames€G.€(Jerry)€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€James€W.€Thompson,€Assistant€DistrictÐ L œ ÐAttorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.€€Ð 8!ˆ  ЀÌÓ½ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼í»XX\aì#ÔÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔÐ ü#L# ÐÌÓ  ÓÓ XÓThe€defendant,€Ô_ÔLillieÔ_Ô€Fran€Ferguson,€was€indicted€for€possession€of€cocaine€with€intent€toÐ Ô%$!% Ðsell€and/or€deliver,€possession€of€drug€paraphernalia,€and€failure€to€obey€a€stop€sign.€€After€the€Ð À&"& Ðdefendantððs€motion€to€suppress€the€evidence€was€denied,€she€entered€a€guilty€plea€to€possession€ofÐ ¬'ü"' Ðless€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€deliver,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„17„417,€a€Class€C€felony.€Ð ˜(è#( ÐThe€plea€bargain€was€for€a€four„year€suspended€sentence,€with€other€conditions.€€Two€certifiedÐ „)Ô$) Ðquestions€of€law€were€properly€reserved,€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€ProcedureÐ p*À%* Ð37(b)(2).€€The€certified€questions€are:€(1)€whether€a€òòTerryóó€search€was€justified€under€theÐ \+¬&+ Ðcircumstances,€and€(2)€whether€the€incriminating€nature€of€the€contraband€was€immediately€apparent.€Ð H,˜', ÐThe€defendant€also€pled€guilty€to€failure€to€obey€a€stop€sign,€which€was€not€appealed.Ð 4-„(-ý' ÐÔ_ÔÓ Xh ÓÌòòò òÓ  ÓBackgroundóóó óÐ œì ÐÓÜÓÌÓ XÓOn€August€5,€1999,€about€8:00€or€9:00€p.m.,€Officer€Jeff€€Sheppard€of€the€Jackson€PoliceÐ tÄ ÐDepartment€was€performing€surveillance€on€a€residence€anonymously€reported€to€be€a€ð ðcrack€house.ðð€Ð `° ÐThe€officer€had€within€the€last€two€days€made€an€arrest€of€two€men€for€possession€of€crack€cocaineÐ L œ Ðafter€they€left€the€same€residence.€€The€officer€observed€the€defendant,€Lillie€Fran€Ferguson,€a€sixty„Ð 8 ˆ Ðone„year„old€woman,€and€another€female€companion€park€their€vehicle€and€enter€the€residence.€Ð $ t ÐAfter€five€to€ten€minutes,€the€women€returned€and€left€in€the€vehicle.€€Officer€Sheppard€followedÐ  ` Ðand,€shortly€thereafter,€observed€the€defendant€fail€to€obey€a€stop€sign.€€He€then€initiated€a€stop€andÐ ü L  Ðrequested€the€defendantððs€driverððs€license.€€When€the€defendant€did€not€immediately€produce€theÐ è 8  Ðlicense,€the€officer€asked€her€to€step€out€of€the€car€and€performed€a€pat€down€or€òòTerryóó€frisk.€€DuringÐ Ô$  Ðthis€time,€the€defendant€produced€her€license.€€The€officer€testified€that€it€was€his€policy€duringÐ À  Ðtraffic€stops€to€pat€down€everyone€he€thought€might€have€a€weapon.Ð ¬ü  ÐÐ ˜è  ÐPursuant€to€the€pat€down,€the€officer€felt€what€he€was€ð ð99%€sureðð€was€a€crack€pipe€in€theÐ „Ô  Ðdefendantððs€right€front€pants€pocket.€€He€described€it€as€an€aluminum€pipe,€broken€from€a€carÐ pÀ Ðantenna,€with€little€edges€that€were€sharp€and€bent€out.€€Contemporaneously€with€the€frisk,€heÐ \¬ Ðquestioned€the€defendant€as€to€whether€she€had€a€crack€pipe€and€if€she€had€crack€on€her.€€She€repliedÐ H˜ Ðaffirmatively€to€both€questions€and€produced€the€respective€contraband€items.€€A€search€of€theÐ 4„ Ðvehicle€produced€another€crack€pipe€with€one€or€two€crack€cocaine€rocks€from€under€the€passengerÐ  p Ðseat.€€Ð  \ ÐÐ øH ÐÔ‡ X\aXXX\aÔòòò òÓ XÓÓ  ÓAnalysisó óóóÐ ä4 ÐÌÓnÓÓ X`ÓThe€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€at€the€hearing€on€a€motion€to€suppress€are€bindingÐ ¼  Ðupon€this€Court€unless€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€against€them.€€òòState€v.Ð ¨ø ÐRossóó,€49€S.W.3d€833,€839€(Tenn.€2001).€€The€trial€court,€as€the€trier€of€fact,€is€able€to€assess€theÐ ”ä Ðcredibility€of€the€witnesses,€determine€the€weight€and€value€to€be€afforded€the€evidence,€and€resolveÐ €Ð Ðany€conflicts€in€the€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996).€€The€prevailing€partyÐ l¼ Ðis€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€drawn€fromÐ X ¨ Ðthat€evidence.€€òòState€v.€Hicksóó,€55€S.W.3d€515,€521€(Tenn.€2001).€€However,€this€Court€is€not€boundÐ D!” Ðby€the€trial€courtððs€conclusions€of€law.€€òòState€v.€Simpsonóó,€968€S.W.2d€776,€779€(Tenn.€1998).€€TheÐ 0"€  Ðapplication€of€the€law€to€the€facts€found€by€the€trial€court€are€questions€of€law€that€this€Court€reviewsÐ #l! Ðde€novo.€€òòState€v.€Danielóó,€12€S.W.3d€420,€423€(Tenn.€2000).€€The€defendant€has€the€burden€ofÐ $X" Ðestablishing€that€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€findings€of€fact€madeÐ ô$D # Ðby€the€trial€court.€€òòBraziel€v.€Stateóó,€529€S.W.2d€501,€506€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1975).Ð à%0!$ ÐÐ Ì&"% ÐA€warrantless€search€is€presumed€unreasonable€under€both€the€federal€and€Tennessee€stateÐ ¸'#& Ðconstitutions,€and€evidence€seized€from€the€warrantless€search€is€subject€to€suppression€unless€theÐ ¤(ô#' ÐState€demonstrates€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€the€search€was€ð ðconducted€pursuant€toÐ )à$( Ðâ âone€of€the€narrowly€defined€exceptions€to€the€warrant€requirement.ðð€€òòState€v.€Simpsonóó,€968€S.W.2dÐ |*Ì%) Ð776,€780€(Tenn.€1998);€€òòseeóó€òòCoolidge€v.€New€Hampshireóó,€403€U.S.€443,€454„55,€91€S.€Ct.€2022,Ð ° Ð2032,€29€L.€Ed.€2d€564€(1971).€Ð œì Ðâ âÐ ˆØ ÐUnder€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„7„118,€an€officer€who€witnesses€certainÐ tÄ Ðmisdemeanors€is€required€to€cite€and€release€the€offender€as€opposed€to€effecting€a€custodial€arrest.€Ð `° ÐòòState€v.€Walkeróó,€12€S.W.3d€460€(Tenn.€2000).€€There€are€eight€exceptions€to€the€ð ðcite€and€releaseððÐ L œ Ðrequirement€contained€in€the€statute,€none€of€which€are€applicable€to€this€case.€€Therefore,€a€citizenÐ 8 ˆ Ðhas€a€presumptive€right€to€be€cited€and€released€for€failure€to€obey€a€stop€sign,€rather€than€beingÐ $ t Ðplaced€under€custodial€arrest.Ð  ` ÐÐ ü L  ÐHowever,€the€Fourth€Amendment€permits€a€protective€frisk€prior€to€release€where€a€lawÐ è 8  Ðenforcement€officer€has€reasonable€suspicion€that€the€suspect€is€armed.€€òòTerry€v.€Ohioóó,€392€U.S.€1,Ð Ô$  Ð21,€88€S.€Ct.€1868,€1880,€20€L.€Ed.€2d€889,€906€(1968);€òòState€v.€Watkinsóó,€827€S.W.2d€293,€294Ð À  Ð(Tenn.€1992);€òòState€v.€Winnóó,€974€S.W.2d€700,€703€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).Ð ¬ü  ÐÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓ XÓIn€determining€whether€a€police€officerððs€reasonable€suspicion€isÐ ˜è  Ðsupported€by€specific€and€articulable€facts,€a€court€must€consider€theÐ „Ô  Ðtotality€of€the€circumstances.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Cortezóó,€449€U.S.€411,Ð pÀ Ð417,€101€S.Ct.€690,€695,€66€L.€Ed.€2d€621,€629€(1981).€€This€includes,Ð \¬ Ðbut€is€not€limited€to,€objective€observations,€information€obtainedÐ H˜ Ðfrom€other€police€officers€or€agencies,€information€obtained€fromÐ 4„ Ðcitizens,€and€the€pattern€of€operation€of€certain€offenders.€€òòId.óó,€449Ð  p ÐU.S.€at€418,€101€S.Ct.€at€695,€66€L.€Ed.€2d€at€629.€€A€court€must€alsoÐ  \ Ðconsider€the€rational€inferences€and€deductions€that€a€trained€policeÐ øH Ðofficer€may€draw€from€the€facts€and€circumstances€known€to€him.€Ð ä4 ÐòòTerryóó,€392€U.S.€at€21,€88€S.Ct.€at€1880,€20€L.Ed.€2d€at€906.Ð Ð  ÐÓ °³%ÓÓ °¥%ÓòòWatkinsóó,€827€S.W.2d€at€294.Ð ¼  ÐÌÓ XÁ%ÓThe€officer€had€approximately€five€to€six€months€experience€on€the€Jackson€Metro€NarcoticsÐ ”ä ÐUnit€and€eight€years€total€experience€in€police€work€and€arrests€involving€drug€offenders.€€Based€onÐ €Ð Ðhis€experience,€he€testified€that,€ð ðMy€experiences€with€people€that€are€involved€in€the€narcotics€tradeÐ l¼ Ðor€use€tend€to€have€some€type€of€weapon€on€them.ðð€€According€to€the€officer,€less€than€two€minutesÐ X ¨ Ðhad€elapsed€since€the€defendant€had€emerged€from€an€alleged€crack€house€when€he€performed€theÐ D!” Ðfrisk.€€On€cross„examination,€when€asked€if€he€frisked€everybody€he€stopped,€the€officer€answered:Ð 0"€  Ðð ðEverybody€that€I€have€reason€to€think€might€have€a€weapon,€yes,€sir.ðð€€Officer€Sheppard€furtherÐ #l! Ðtestified€that€on€routine€traffic€stops€such€as€speeding€or€running€a€stop€sign,€he€may€not€perform€aÐ $X" Ðfrisk.€Ð ô$D # ÐÐ à%0!$ ÐFrisks€have€been€deemed€reasonable€when€the€suspected€crime€typically€involves€the€use€ofÐ Ì&"% Ða€weapon;€for€example,€a€suspicion€of€robbery,€burglary,€rape,€assault€with€a€weapon,€homicide,€andÐ ¸'#& Ðlarge€scale€narcotics€trafficking.€€òòWinnóó,€974€S.W.2d€at€703.€€ò ò€ó óIf€the€suspected€crime,€as€here,€doesÐ ¤(ô#' Ðnot€typically€involve€the€use€of€a€weapon,€then€ð ðother€circumstancesðð€must€be€present.€€òòSibron€v.Ð ”)ä$( ÐNew€Yorkóó,€392€U.S.€40,€74,€88€S.€Ct.€1889,€1907,€20€L.€Ed.€2d€917€(1968);€òòWinnóó,€974€S.W.2d€atÐ €*Ð%) Ð703„704.Ð l+¼&* ЇThis€Court€has€previously€considered€a€plethora€of€ð ðother€circumstancesðð€as€follows:Ð ° ÐÓ XÓÓ °ÓÓ °Ó[A]€€€characteristic€bulge€in€the€suspectððs€clothing;€observation€of€anÐ œì Ðobject€in€the€pocket€which€might€be€a€weapon;€an€otherwiseÐ ˆØ Ðinexplicable€sudden€movement€toward€a€pocket€or€other€place€whereÐ tÄ Ða€weapon€could€be€concealed;€an€otherwise€inexplicable€failure€toÐ `° Ðremove€a€hand€from€a€pocket;€backing€away€by€the€suspect€underÐ L œ Ðcircumstances€suggesting€he€was€moving€back€to€give€himself€timeÐ 8 ˆ Ðand€space€to€draw€a€weapon;€awareness€that€the€suspect€hadÐ $ t Ðpreviously€been€engaged€in€serious€criminal€conduct;€awareness€thatÐ  ` Ðthe€suspect€had€previously€been€armed;€[and]€discovery€of€a€weaponÐ ü L  Ðin€the€suspectððs€possession€.€.€.€.€Ð è 8  ÐÓ °ÓÓ °ÓòòWinnóó,€974€S.W.2d€at€704.Ô#†X\aXX X\a;#ÔÔ#†¼í»XX\a' #ÔÔ‡ ¼í»»¼íÔÔ‡ X\aX» ¼íÔ€LaFave,€òòSearch€and€Seizureóó,€ðð€9.5(a)€(3d€ed.€1996€&€Supp.€1997)Ð Ô$  Ð(footnotes€and€citations€omitted).€€òòóóÐ À  ÐÌÓ XÓThe€record€is€devoid€of€any€ð ðother€circumstancesðð€such€as€furtive€movements,€suspiciousÐ ˜è  Ðbulges,€or€prior€knowledge€of€the€defendant€at€the€time€of€the€stop€and€seizure.€€The€State€posits€thatÐ „Ô  Ðthe€officer€believed€he€was€subjected€to€a€ð ðheightened€level€of€dangerðð€when€stopping€the€defendant,Ð pÀ Ðbased€on€defendantððs€just€leaving€an€alleged€crack€house€and€that€the€officer€had,€two€days€prior,Ð \¬ Ðarrested€two€other€men€for€cocaine€possession€after€they€left€the€same€residence.Ô#†X\aXX X\aä4#ÔÔ‡ X\aXXX\aÔÔ#† ¼í»X X\a5#ÔÔ‡ X\aX» ¼íÔ€€While€mindful€ofÐ H˜ Ðlaw€enforcement€officersðð€need€to€ensure€their€safety€when€confronting€suspects,€under€these€facts,Ð 4„ Ðwe€cannot€discern€a€reasonable€and€articulable€suspicion€to€justify€a€òòTerryóó€frisk.Ð  p ÐÐ  \ ÐThe€defendant€further€complains€that€the€crack€pipeððs€incriminating€nature€was€notÐ øH Ðimmediately€apparent€as€contraband.€€The€defendant€relies€upon€òòMinnesota€v.€Dickersonóó,€508€U.S.Ð ä4 Ð366,€113€S.€Ct.€2130,€124€L.€Ed.€2d€334€(1993),€and€òòState€v.€Bridgesóó,€963€S.W.2d€€487€(Tenn.€1997).€Ð Ð  ÐUnder€this€authority,€the€ð ðplain€feelðð€doctrine€allows€a€warrantless€search€and€seizure€if:Ð ¼  ÐÓ€ (¦Ù83ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  ÝÓ XÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓÓ$` ’,p”X°œX$ÓÝ‚3£<ÝÔ2¦ÙÔ(Ú  Ú1Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0 Œ àÝ  Ýa€prior€valid€reason€exists€for€the€intrusion,€i.e.,€the€pat€downÐ ¨ø Ðmust€be€permissible€under€òòTerryóó;݃3£<ƒ<ÝŒÐ”äŒ xŒ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚3£œ=ÝÔ2¦ÙÔ(Ú  Ú2Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0 Œ àÝ  Ýthe€contraband€is€detected€while€the€òòTerryóó€search€for€weaponsÐ €Ð Ðlegitimately€is€still€in€progress;€and€Ýƒ3£œ=É=ÝŒÐl¼Œ xŒ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚3£å>ÝÔ2¦ÙÔ(Ú  Ú3Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0 Œ àÝ  Ýthe€incriminating€nature€of€the€object€perceived€by€the€officerððsÐ X ¨ Ðsense€of€touch€is€immediately€apparent€giving€the€officer€probableÐ D!” Ðcause€to€believe€the€object€is€contraband€prior€to€its€seizure.݃3£å>?ÝŒÐ0"€ Œ xŒ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÓ °ÓÓ °ÓHaving€held€that€the€frisk€in€this€case€was€not€justified€by€articulable€and€reasonable€suspicion,€theÐ #l! Ðintrusive€frisk€would€fail€on€that€basis.€€However,€for€completeness€of€review€we€will€analyze€theÐ $X" Ðdefendantððs€second€issue€on€the€assumption€of€a€valid€òòTerryóó€frisk.€Ð ô$D # ÐÌÓ XÓòòState€v.€Bridgesóó€contains€a€succinct€summary€as€to€when€an€officerððs€tactile€perceptions€giveÐ Ì&"% Ðprobable€cause€to€believe€the€item€is€contraband€prior€to€seizure:Ð ¸'#& ÐÓ XÓÓ °ÓÓ °ÓProbable€cause€exists€when€the€facts€and€circumstances€within€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðofficerððs€knowledge€are€sufficient€to€warrant€a€person€of€reasonableÐ )à$( Ðcaution€in€the€belief€that€the€item€may€be€contraband.€€òòBrownóó,€460Ð |*Ì%) ÐU.S.€at€742,€103€S.Ct.€at€1543.€€Probable€cause€ð ðdoes€not€demand€anyÐ h+¸&* Ðshowing€that€such€a€belief€be€correct€or€more€likely€true€than€false.ðð€Ð ° ÐòòId.óó€€In€determining€whether€probable€cause€exists,€courts€mustÐ œì Ðconsider€the€totality€of€the€circumstances€including€the€officerððsÐ ˆØ Ðtestimony€and€factual€knowledge€based€upon€prior€law€enforcementÐ tÄ Ðexperience.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Rushingóó,€935€S.W.2d€30,€33€(Mo.banc.Ð `° Ð1996);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€Trineóó,€236€Conn.€216,€673€A.2d€1098,€1100Ð L œ Ð(1996).€€Courts€should€not€surrender€their€common€sense€assessmentÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€the€sensory€capacities€of€human€touch€to€an€officerððs€assertion€thatÐ $ t Ðhe€or€she€ð ðimmediately€knewðð€the€nature€of€the€object€touched.€€òòSeeóó€òòÐ  ` Ðe.g.óó,€òòJones€v.€Stateóó,€343€Md.€448,€682€A.2d€248,€252€(1996)€(ð ðitððs€notÐ ü L  Ðjust€a€question€of€being€an€expert€and€coming€in€and€saying€the€magicÐ è 8  Ðwordsðð).€€The€officerððs€subjective€belief€that€the€object€is€contrabandÐ Ô$  Ðis€not€sufficient€unless€it€is€objectively€reasonable€in€light€of€all€theÐ À  Ðcircumstances€known€at€the€time€of€the€search.€€òòTrineóó,€673€A.2d€atÐ ¬ü  Ð1109.€€An€officerððs€testimony€is€a€factor€in€determining€the€legality€ofÐ ˜è  Ða€seizure€under€the€plain€feel€doctrine,€but€it€is€not€dispositive€andÐ „Ô  Ðdoes€not€end€a€courtððs€inquiry.€€òòWondersóó,€929€P.2d€at€799.Ô#†X\aXX X\a)8#ÔÔ‡ X\aXXX\aÔÔ#† ¼í»X X\ak8#ÔÔ‡ X\aX» ¼íÔÐ pÀ ÐÓ °ÓÓ °Ó963€S.W.2d€at€494„95€(Tenn.€1997).Ð \¬ ÐÌÓ XÓOfficer€Sheppard€described€the€object€as€a€pipe€made€of€aluminum,€broken€from€a€carÐ 4„ Ðantenna,€with€little€edges,€sharp€and€bent€out.€€The€officer,€in€his€words,€felt€ð ð99%€sureðð€it€was€aÐ  p Ðcrack€pipe€upon€feeling€it.€€Based€upon€this€testimony,€as€well€as€the€experience€of€Officer€Sheppard,Ð  \ Ðwe€conclude€that,€under€the€ð ðplain€feelðð€doctrine,€he€was€justified€in€his€belief€that€this€object€wasÐ øH Ða€crack€pipe.€€However,€since€we€have€concluded€that€his€pat€down€of€the€defendant€was€notÐ ä4 Ðjustified,€this€belief€cannot€justify€the€unlawful€search.€Ð Ð  ÐÐ ¼  ÐHaving€concluded€that€the€officer€lacked€reasonable€suspicion€to€justify€a€òòTerryóó€frisk,€it€isÐ ¨ø Ðnecessary€to€suppress€the€evidence€seized.Ô#†X\aXX X\aÒJ#ÔÔ‡ X\aXXX\aÔÔ#† ¼í»X X\aK#ÔÔ‡ X\aX» ¼íÔÐ ”ä ÐÐ €Ð ÐòòÓ XÓÓ  Óò òConclusionóóÔ#†X\aXX X\a&O#ÔÔ#†¼í»XX\ahO#Ôà @¸ àó óÔ‡ ¼í»»¼íÔÔ‡ X\aX» ¼íÔÐ l¼ ÐÌÓÂOÓÓ X´OÓÔ#†X\aXX X\a3P#ÔÔ#†¼í»XX\aRP#ÔÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔÔ‡X\aXXX\aÔAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€reverse€and€dismiss€the€defendantððs€conviction€of€possessionÐ D!” ÐÔ#†X\aXXX\aQ#Ôof€less€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€deliverÔ‡X\aXXX\aÔÔ#†¼í»XX\aïP#ÔÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔ€and€remand€to€the€trial€court.€€Ô#†X\aXXX\aüQ#ÔÔ#†¼í»XX\a>R#ÔÔ‡X\aX»¼íÔÔ‡ X\aXXX\aÔÐ 0"€  ÐÐ #l! ÐÔ#†X\aXX X\aãR#ÔÔ#†¼í»XX\aÄR#ÔÐ $X" Ðà0 4 àà0` 4(#4(#àà0Œ ` (#` (#àà0¸ Œ (#Œ (#àà0ä ¸ (#¸ (#àà0ä (#ä (#àà0<(#(#àà0h<(#<(#àà0”h(#h(#àà0À”(#”(#àà ” à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ô$D # Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð &V!$ Ð__________________________________€Ð'h"%À(#À(# Ðà 4 àà ` àà Œ àà ¸ àà ä àà  àà < à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€JOHN€EVERETT€WILLIAMS,€JUDGE