N.D.Ill.: RS not required to approach a person to talk to him

“Williams first argues that the police officers violated the Fourth Amendment by approaching him without reasonable suspicion. R. 33 at 17. But reasonable suspicion is only required when a suspect has been seized. United States v. Douglass, 467 F.3d 621, 623 (7th Cir. 2006).” “Nor, for the matter, was reasonable suspicion required for the officers to give chase once Williams started running. ‘[A] fleeing suspect–even one who is confronted with an obvious show of authority–is not seized until his freedom of movement is terminated by intentional application of physical force or by the suspect’s submission to the asserted authority.’ Mays, 819 F.3d at 956. Rather, a ‘seizure effected by a show of authority occurs when the suspect submits.’ … So, like the initial approach toward Williams, no amount of suspicion was needed to chase Williams–he was not ‘seized’ under the Fourth Amendment.” “Indeed it was not until Williams leapt the security fence for a second time and obeyed Officer Callahan’s command to ‘get on the ground’ that a seizure was effectuated.” United States v. Williams, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 1, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.