NCJ Number
135649
Journal
American Criminal Law Review Volume: 28 Issue: 4 Dated: (1991) Pages: 799-842
Date Published
1991
Length
44 pages
Annotation
Two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have redefined what constitutes a seizure of a person within the meaning of the protections under the fourth amendment. A person is now seized only when police actions would be an arrest at common law -- when the person submits to a show of authority by police or when the police apply physical force.
Abstract
The ruling in California v. Hodari D. will significantly expand the way police legally operate and, as a result, will restrict the privacy rights of individuals. In Florida v. Bostick, the court clarified the reasonable person test, which is used to determine when a seizure develops as a result of a police accosting when the suspect complies with police instructions. These cases imply that the court will restrict what will be considered the results of an unlawful seizure and document the shift in judicial interpretation of the fourth amendment from protecting individual rights to promoting governmental interests. The author maintains that the Hodari D. Standard fails to strike a proper balance between these interests because it fails to consider unwarranted coercion and intimidation of individuals stemming from attempts to seize by requiring justification for such conduct. It also takes the response of the suspect into account, while the fourth amendment depends only on the actions of the governmental agents. 203 notes