Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State v. Ruff
Citation: 237 So. 3d 490Docket: No. 2017–KK–1980
Court: Supreme Court of Louisiana; February 1, 2018; Louisiana; State Supreme Court
The case involves David Ruff, who was approached by Deputy Travis Depew while shopping at a hardware store due to an investigation into potential criminal activity. Deputy Depew requested Ruff's identification and insisted he step over to the police car for a database check. Ruff became agitated, leading Depew to perceive him as threatening, prompting Depew to wrestle Ruff to the ground and handcuff him. The legal analysis distinguishes between an arrest, which requires probable cause, and an investigatory stop, which necessitates only reasonable suspicion. The standard for an investigatory stop, as outlined in *Terry v. Ohio*, demands a particularized and objective basis for suspecting the individual of criminal activity, rather than a vague suspicion or hunch. The court noted that Deputy Depew, in his testimony, indicated he did not suspect Ruff of any crime; the actual suspect was someone else named Travis Johnson. Once Ruff provided his identification confirming his identity, the investigation should have ceased. The document asserts Ruff had the right to resist what was deemed an unlawful arrest, citing established Louisiana law that permits individuals to resist illegal arrests. Therefore, the conclusion is to grant the writ based on the outlined legal principles and the specifics of the case.