NCJ Number
114657
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 79 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1988) Pages: 437-482
Date Published
1988
Length
46 pages
Annotation
This article critiques the U.S. Supreme Court's test for the 'nonseizure' of citizens by police in United States v. Mendenhall (1980), examines the application of the test in lower courts, and considers alternatives to this test.
Abstract
The Mendenhall test, more familiarly known as the Mendenhall-Royer test because of the Court's later adoption of the test in Florida v. Royer, provides that police encounters with citizens are 'nonseizures' when a 'reasonable person' would feel free to walk away from the officer. Classifying a police-citizen encounter as a nonseizure means the officer need not have an objective basis for initiating the encounter. In examining the two cases in which the test was developed, the article concludes the test was developed with virtually no analysis of why it is the appropriate means to determine when a citizen has been seized by the police. The same lack of analysis characterized the Court's adoption of the test in 'Royer.' Some lower courts have interpreted the test to mean that in the absence of an explicit show of authority or threat of force, a reasonable person feels free to walk away from an encounter initiated by an officer, regardless of the officer's reasons for initiating the encounter. The article argues that a per se rule based on the purpose for which a police officer initiates the encounter would best provide the appropriate balance between the liberty interest of citizens and the crime-fighting interest of the state. 231 footnotes.