D.Conn.: In a stop, hesitation then flight is still no submission to authority

When the police tried to stop defendant, he hesitated and then ran, leaving a duffle bag with a gun inside. He argued he was unconstitutionally stopped. No. “In order ‘to comply with an order to stop—and thus to become seized—a suspect must do more than halt temporarily; he must submit to police authority, for “there is no seizure without actual submission.”’ United States v. Baldwin, 496 F.3d 215, 218 (2d Cir. 2007) (quoting Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249, 254 (2007)); see also United States v. Valentine, 232 F.3d 350, 359 (3d Cir. 2000) (‘Even if Valentine paused for a few moments and gave his name, he did not submit in any realistic sense to the officers’ show of authority, and therefore there was no seizure until Officer Woodard grabbed him.’); United States v. Washington, 12 F.3d 1128, 1132 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (‘[The defendant] initially stopped, but he drove off quickly before Officer Hemphill even reached the car. Because [the defendant] did not submit to Hemphill’s order, he was not seized.’); United States v. Hernandez, 27 F.3d 1403, 1407 (9th Cir. 1994) (‘Hernandez requests we find he submitted to authority and was seized, despite his subsequent flight, merely because he hesitated for a moment and made direct eye contact with Sadar. We decline to hold these actions sufficient to constitute submission to authority.’).” United States v. Huertas, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43406 (D.Conn. April 1, 2015).

Defendant raised enough to get a hearing on his motion to suppress because the consent form is confusing and it’s undisputed that his mother was highly distraught when she signed the consent form. The hearing is postponed pending defendant’s mental exam. United States v. Bishop, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44096 (S.D.Ala. April 3, 2015).*