Today she took that argument to the high court, where, virtually, before Justice Martha Alexander the oral arguments were made. After the hearing we spoke with his attorney Leslie Mendez who told us why this case was so important.

Leslie Mendez, Attorney
"Shamar filed a constitutional claim to challenge specifically his search and to challenge some of the process before the disciplinary proceedings. Very specifically Shamar makes three claims, the first one was that the search was unconstitutional, because the officers did not have grounds to suspect him of being in possession of any illegal items. Addition to that he also says that the manner in which the search was conducted was unreasonable and excessive. The other aspect of the claim was that in the context of the incident when he was being search Shamar took out his phone to record the search and the officer told him to stop recording and our case indicates as well that in the process of getting him to stop recording he eventually hit Shamar on the hand in order to have the phone fall to the ground to ensure that he is not recording the search."

"This is one of the few cases if not the first case in the region that is looking at the right of, that the right to record within the context of the constitution specifically the right to freedom of expression as an act that seeks to gather information and have access to public official activity. Which we say is one of the main interests that are protected by the right to freedom of expression. which is right to almost oversee or act as watchdogs over the action of public officials are in compliance with the law."

"The last aspect of the case has to do with the disciplinary proceedings and here is where we tried to put before the court a case that seeks to explore the possibilities that exist under the constitution to ensure effective transparent and independent police accountability."

The police officer is represented by attorney Stanley Grinage on behalf go the AG. Arguments are now closed and both sides await the decision of Justice Martha Alexander.