In the past week, Wood & Nathanson has helped strike two significant blows for freedom in cases involving police arrests and searches of motorists.

First, Attorney Claire Ward (a Wood & Nathanson alumna) returned to Massachusetts to argue a brief she filed while still with us. She convinced the Supreme Judicial Court to rule on January 29 that the police may not simply pat frisk any motorist they like based upon an assertion that they felt in danger. The Supreme Court has required for fifty years that the police must have reasonable suspicion that a suspect is both armed and dangerous. The Supreme Judicial Court admitted that it had created confusion over the standard in the past thirty years. It reiterated that people should be free from stop and frisk unless there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is armed, even in a “high crime” area. The whole firm spent significant time helping Attorney Ward prepare for argument and she was incredibly persuasive.

Second, Attorney Wood and a team of ACLU lawyers drafted an amicus brief on behalf of the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Commonwealth v. Goncalves-Mendes. That brief helped convince the Supreme Judicial Court to rule for the first time that police cannot routinely impound and search the car of an arrested motorist when a sober, qualified driver is available to take possession of the car.

We will continue to proudly fight against unconstitutional government intrusion into people’s lives, particularly where jail or prison is at stake.