{"id":2339,"date":"2008-09-12T15:26:25","date_gmt":"2008-08-07T08:28:59","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-08-07T08:28:59","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=2339","title":{"rendered":"CA4:  Defendant free to go when officer asked more questions; stop not unreasonably extended"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant was clearly free to go when the officer started to ask more questions, so the stop was not unreasonably extended. <a href=\"http:\/\/pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov\/opinion.pdf\/074498.P.pdf\">United States v. Farrior<\/a>, 535 F.3d 210 (4th Cir. 2008)*:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Contrary to Farrior&#8217;s assertion, the officers did not unreasonably prolong the traffic stop. Under our and other circuits&#8217; precedents, the traffic stop ended once Officer Morris returned his license and registration, orally warned him to fix his tag light, and told him that he was free to go. See, e.g., <em>United States v. Singh<\/em>, 363 F.3d 347, 356 (4th Cir. 2004) (holding that once an officer issues a warning or citation and returns a driver&#8217;s license and registration, the driver may &#8220;proceed on his way, without being subject to further delay by police for additional questioning&#8221; (internal quotation marks omitted)); <em>United States v. Alexander<\/em>, 448 F.3d 1014, 1016 (8th Cir. 2006) (&#8220;Once an officer has decided to permit a routine traffic offender to depart with a ticket, a warning, or [no ticket at all], the Fourth Amendment applies to limit any subsequent detention or search.&#8221;). But the end of the traffic stop did not signal the beginning of an unconstitutional seizure in this case.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court has made it very clear that a &#8220;seizure does not occur simply because a police officer approaches an individual and asks a few questions.&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=501&amp;invol=429\"><em>Florida v. Bostick<\/em><\/a>, 501 U.S. 429, 434 (1991). In the absence of a seizure, a police-citizen encounter is considered consensual and &#8220;will not trigger Fourth Amendment scrutiny.&#8221; <em>Id<\/em>. at 434. Under Bostick, the question is whether a reasonable person would have felt free to decline the officer&#8217;s request or otherwise terminate the encounter. Id. at 439. So long as a reasonable person would feel free &#8220;to disregard the police and go about his business,&#8221; <a href=\"http:\/\/caselaw.lp.findlaw.com\/scripts\/getcase.pl?court=us&amp;vol=499&amp;invol=621\"><em>California v. Hodari D.<\/em><\/a>, 499 U.S. 621, 628 (1991), the encounter is consensual and no reasonable suspicion is required. See also <em>United States v. Sullivan<\/em>, 138 F.3d 126, 131 (4th Cir. 1998) (&#8220;When a stop is over and its purpose served, &#8230; mere questioning by officers, without some indicated restraint, does not amount [to] &#8230; a seizure under the Fourth Amendment.&#8221;). Employing the <em>Bostick<\/em> inquiry, the district court determined that the encounter between Farrior and Officer Morris was consensual because &#8220;a reasonable person in Farrior&#8217;s position would have felt free to decline Officer Morris&#8217;s request.&#8221; (J.A. 60-61.) We do not find any error in the district court&#8217;s analysis.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=2339\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2339","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2339"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2339\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}