Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

4th Amendment: Seizures - Coggle Diagram

- - - - A seizure occurs when in view of all of the circumstances, a reasonable person would have believed that she was not free to leave or otherwise terminate the police encounter.
    - - INS conducted surveys of 3 garment factories placing several agents near exits while others dispersed throughout the factories to question most employees about their citizenship. If the employee gave unsatisfactory response or admitted that he was an alien, the employee was asked to produce immigration papers. The officers displayed their badges, carried radios, and were armed.
        
        Rationale: Because the workers were free to move about the factory and none attempted to leave and were detained, a reasonable person would not have felt that they were free to leave.
    - - Bostick was traveling via bus from Miami to Atlanta. During a stop in Ft. Lauderdale, 2 officers (badges, insignia, and a gun in a zipper pouch) boarded the bus and without RS, asked to inspect his ticket and ID and asked for consent to search his bags.
        
        Issue:
        
        whether a seizure occurred
        
        Rationale
        
        Bostick’s movements were confined by his decision to take the bus; it says nothing abut whether or not the police conduct at issue was coercive. No seizure occurs when police ask questions, ask to examine ID, or request consent, so long as the officers do not convey a message that compliance with their request is required.
  - - - 2 plain clothes officers at Miami International Airport approached Royer because they believed his appearance, mannerisms, and luggage fit the drug courier profile. They identified themselves as and asked if Royer had a moment to speak to them; he said “yes.” Royer produced an airline ticket (with name “Holt” like baggage) and DL (name “Royer”). Royer became nervous when asked about discrepancy and was asked to move to a room, 40 feet away, and he complied. One detective then went to retrieve the “Hold” luggage from airline using the claim stub. Royer was asked for consent to search the suitcase and without answering Royer produced a key and drugs were found in the bag.
        
        Rule
        
        an investigative detention must be temporary and last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop. Investigative methods should be least intrusive means reasonably available to verity or dispel the officer’s suspicion in a short period of time
        
        Rationale
        
        when officers discovered that Royer was traveling with an assumed name, plus their suspicions about him being a drug courier (paying cash for one way ticket, mode of checking the two bags, and appearance and conduct); gave the officers reasonable suspicion to believe that a crime was afoot, and could detain him to verify or dispel their suspicions in a manner that did not exceed the limits of an investigative detention. However, what began as a consensual encounter in a public place, escalated into an arrest when Royer was moved, to the police interrogation room (without any safety or security concerns justifying moving him), while the officers kept Royer’s ticket, ID, and luggage (keeping him from being able to leave), while they continued to ask about his actions. The officer’s conduct was more intrusive than necessary to effectuate an investigative detention otherwise authorized by Terry, therefore an unlawful seizure took place.