BRIDGEPORT CT –-(Ammoland.com)- A federal judge rejected a Connecticut police officer’s request for qualified immunity after he arrested a man for carrying his legally processed gun.
Basel Soukaneh was driving his Kia Sorento in a high crime area in Waterbury, Connecticut, when the GPS on his iPhone froze up. The neighborhood is well-known for prostitution and drugs. Soukaneh pulled over his car to try to fix his phone that was in a phone holder. Officer David Andrzejewski noticed the stopped vehicle and started a traffic stop.
Officer Andrzejewski knocked on Mr. Soukaneh’s window. When Soukaneh rolled down the window and said “hi” to the officer, Soukaneh claimed that Andrzejewski screamed at him for his license. Soukaneh handed the police officer his license and gun permit. He informed Andrzejewski that he had a legally owned and carried pistol in the car with him. The cop grabbed Soukaneh and forcibly removed him from his Kia, and threw him on the ground.
Mr. Soukaneh claims that Officer Andrzejewski demanded that he tell the officer where the prostitute and drugs were located. The officer searched Soukaneh pulled out pills from the man’s pocket. The officer thought he found illicit drugs. In reality, what the officer discovered was Soukaneh’s nitroglycerin pills for his heart condition. In addition to the heart medication, the officer seized the $320 in cash plus a flash drive that contained pictures and videos of Soukaneh’s deceased father. Neither the flash drive nor the money was returned to Soukaneh.
The officer Handcuffed Soukaneh and threw him in the back of his police car. Soukaneh, who suffers from a bad back, screamed in pain. According to court records, the officer grabbed the handcuffs and jerked them, causing Soukaneh to be trapped in a position where he was partially on the floor of the back of the police cruiser, unable to see.
Officer Andrzejewski ran Soukaneh’s gun permit and found it to be valid. Shortly after, another officer and a sergeant arrived on the scene. Andrzejewski asked the two what he should “write him up for.” The sergeant told Andrzejewski what to write into the computer system.
Officer Andrzejewski claims that the initial stop was justified because he had “reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity.” He further states that the search of the vehicle and Soukaneh himself was based on probable cause. The officer claims that Soukaneh telling him that he was armed with a legally owned firearm with a valid permit was the probable cause needed to search the man and his vehicle.
Mr. Soukaneh is claiming that Officer Andrzejewski violated his Fourth Amendment rights by illegally searching him and his vehicle. He claims that the police officer didn’t have “reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity” to initiate the stop and that Officer Andrzejewski didn’t have probable cause for the search.
Officer Andrzejewski claims he is “entitled to qualified immunity because any violated rights were not clearly established.” According to the courts, “Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about legal questions.”
United States District Court, D. Connecticut Judge Janet Bond Arterton agreed that Officer Andrzejewski had reasonable suspicion due to the area where Soukaneh stopped his car. But Judge Arterton found that Officer Andrzejewski did not have probable cause to search Soukaneh’s car and person.
Moreover, Judge Bond Arterton stripped Andrzejewski of qualified immunity.
The Judge said, “no reasonable officer could believe probable cause was present.” According to Judge Bond Arterton, just because Soukaneh had a gun, it did not give the officer the right to act the way he did. The Judge said that any contrary holding “would eviscerate Fourth Amendment protections for lawfully armed individuals.”
Mr. Soukaneh’s lawsuit against Officer Andrzejewski will be allowed to continue.
Federal Denies Police Officer Qualified Immunity After He Arrested Lawful Gun Carrier USCOURTS
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
It’s always infuriating to hear stories like this. Officer Andrzejewski was way out of line and should be disciplined, in addition to the lawsuit. It’s officers like him that turn people against the police.
Cops like that need to be smacked in the face with Lucille. A few times. That would be justice.
“United States District Court, D. Connecticut Judge Janet Bond Arterton agreed that Officer Andrzejewski had reasonable suspicion due to the area where Soukaneh stopped his car.”
If that is the case, then all the public has reasonable suspicion that they will be mishandled by the police because they have a history of that, and should act accordingly.
HLB
Judge made the right call. If not, then police could arrest anyone because “they could have committed some sort of crime.”
That cop needs to be defunded, as well as the idiot that hired him.
What a jackass. it’s cops like him that give LEOs a bad name. See what I did there ? I truly believe there’s a difference between LEOs, and cops, who are just wanna be LEOS.
I have seen the corruption first hand up close, and because of that I find it hard to trust cops.
bad police are nothing new, sheriff of Nottingham, corrupt, power hungry people have always been with us, the laws need to make them accountable not protected
was the plaintiff stopped in the road as the lying officer said? that would be a reason for the lying officer to conduct a field interview. the lying officer should have just run his firearm license, questioned him about why he was stopped there and that should have been the end of the encounter. that it escalated into a civil suit is because the lying officer didn’t follow the laws of the United States of America. only when more courts deny qualified immunity for these lawbreaking officers will they become what they were supposed to be, law enforcement officers, instead… Read more »
Bastard cops should have some neck stretching just like some unnamed folks in the vicinity of DC.
There must be articulable suspicion of a specific crime being committed, or a past crime of which the person is a suspect, or of a crime about to be committed in order for police to violate your right to travel freely. If there is no articulable crime, there is no lawful reason for police to accost anyone. So again, cops have a policy of breaking the law in their interactions with citizens. All that followed after boiled down to violent felonies committed with weapons, as well as color of law violations. The cop and his supervisor sergeant should each be… Read more »