Stopping next to defendant’s car to talk to him wasn’t a seizure. When defendant moved and attempted to leave, the officer told him to stop, and that was a seizure. The encounter was based on an anonymous caller’s information, and it quickly progressed to reasonable suspicion. State v. Crepack, 2018 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 767 (Oct. 12, 2018):
After objectively viewing all the circumstances in this case, we conclude that Deputy Yoakum’s actions in parking beside Crepack’s vehicle and exiting his patrol car did not constitute a “seizure” for the purposes of the Fourth Amendment. The proof shows that Deputy Yoakum’s initial encounter with Crepack was not accompanied by physical force or a show of authority. Deputy Yoakum never drew a weapon, demanded the production of identification, physically restrained Crepack, or blocked his path. … However, in our view, when Deputy Yoakum told Crepack to stop after Crepack began backing out of his parking space, Deputy Yoakum seized Crepack. In reaching this conclusion, we place particular emphasis on the fact that Crepack’s vehicle was in motion when Deputy Yoakum told him to stop.