Direction to defendant to stay in his car during a stop was not a separate seizure. United States v. Warren, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 701 (8th Cir. Jan. 12, 2021).
There was probable cause for defendant’s arrest. Officers bought drugs from him two months earlier but didn’t get the name. He surfaced again, and more cause developed. “ Thus, if probable cause existed to believe that McIntosh-Figueroa had committed a crime, it does not matter whether his detention may have exceeded Terry’s limits. Additionally, if probable cause exists, then an officer’s subjective intent to effect a more limited Terry-style detention is immaterial: ‘[T]he fact that the officer does not have the state of mind which is hypothecated by the reasons which provide the legal justification for the officer’s action does not invalidate the action taken as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justify that action.’ Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146, 153 (2004) (quoting Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996)).” United States v. McIntosh-Figueroa, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5152 (D. Me. Jan. 12, 2021).*