Introduction to the Case
The news coverage about the initial police encounter with Luigi Mangione, who has been charged with murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson last December, describes the routine practice of police officers when they confront a person whom they reasonably suspect of criminal activity.
POOL. Must CREDIT
Luigi Mangione, the Ivy League graduate charged with executing the head of America’s largest health care company on a Midtown sidewalk, is back in Manhattan court today for an evidence hearing that could make or break his state case.
Photos by Steven Hirsch for the NY Post
Steven Hirsch for the New York Post/Pool
The Police Encounter
A pretrial hearing is presently underway presided by Acting Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Gregory Carro in New York to decide on the admissibility of physical evidence taken from Mangione and statements he made. The police encounter happened at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, five days after the murder, after a police dispatcher received a 911 call from the McDonald’s manager that customers were concerned about a man in the restaurant who resembled surveillance images of Thompson’s alleged killer. The manager described what Mangione was wearing — a black jacket, a medical mask and a brown beanie. The dispatcher said an officer was on his way.
Details of the Encounter
A video of the police encounter with Mangione shows the Altoona police officers approaching Mangione who is sitting at a table and directing him to lower his mask. “I knew it was him immediately,” a police officer stated. Mangione at first gave the police a false name. He seemed nervous and his fingers were shaking, according to the police. The police frisked him but found nothing. After backup officers arrived, the police moved Mangione’s backpack aside, testifying that it was heavy and suspected there may be a gun inside. After Mangione gave the officers his real name they arrested him, gave him his Miranda rights, handcuffed him, and searched him and his backpack. He had thousands of dollars in his wallet. His backpack contained a gun, a notebook, and note to the FBI.
Defense Challenges
Mangione’s defense is challenging the initial statements Mangione made to the police before receiving his Miranda rights. But this argument is baseless. When the police stop a person reasonably suspected of criminal activity — and there is absolutely no doubt that the police had a reasonable suspicion that the person they confronted might have been the Thompson killer — the police have the right to ask preliminary questions to either confirm or dispel their reasonable suspicion. This practice has been consistently reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court and the New York courts for over 50 years.
Search and Seizure
The defense is also attacking the search of Mangione’s backpack. They claim the police needed a warrant to search the backpack. But again, this challenge has no merit. The law of police searches is very clear. After a person has been arrested, the police are allowed to search the individual, including all items he may be carrying on his person such as a wallet, and all items he may be carrying with him, such as a backpack, packages, or other containers he can reach into, without the necessity of obtaining a search warrant.
Legal Justifications
The theory, which the courts labeled “Search Incident to Arrest,” has two justifications. First, the police are allowed to conduct an immediate search of the person and the items described above to protect their own safety when the person arrested might be capable of reaching into any of these places, grabbing a weapon, and harming the officer. Second, the officers need to protect any evidence from being destroyed or contaminated by the person arrested. And it would be nonsensical to suggest the police have to delay such a search and wait for a warrant when their own safety and the integrity of evidence may be at risk.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the police did nothing wrong in questioning and searching Luigi Mangione. The initial stop and questioning were justified by reasonable suspicion, and the search of Mangione’s backpack was lawful under the “Search Incident to Arrest” doctrine. The defense challenges to the admissibility of the evidence are baseless, and it is likely that the evidence will be admitted at trial.
FAQs
Q: What was the basis for the police stop of Luigi Mangione?
A: The police stop was based on a 911 call from a McDonald’s manager who reported a customer who resembled the suspect in the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.
Q: Did the police have reasonable suspicion to stop Mangione?
A: Yes, the police had reasonable suspicion based on the description of the suspect and the fact that Mangione matched that description.
Q: Was the search of Mangione’s backpack lawful?
A: Yes, the search of the backpack was lawful under the “Search Incident to Arrest” doctrine, which allows police to search a person and their belongings after a lawful arrest without a warrant.
Q: Who is the author of this article?
A: Bennett L. Gershman is a distinguished professor at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University.
