D.Me.: Detaining def, taking his hotel room key, and moving him from outside the hotel to just outside his hotel room was an arrest; but here with PC

Detaining defendant, taking his hotel room key, and moving him from outside the hotel to just outside his hotel room was a clear indication to defendant he was under arrest. On the totality of circumstances, however, there was probable cause for the arrest. United States v. Flores, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175548 (D.Me. Dec. 20, 2016):

In addition to placing Flores in handcuffs, the officers also seized his room key, performed a pat-down search of his person, and moved him from outside the hotel into the hallway near his hotel room. These circumstances are relevant to the determination of whether a reasonable person in Flores’ position would have understood himself to be under arrest. See Acosta-Colon, 157 F.3d at 17-18 (finding that relocation of suspect during detention supported finding of de facto arrest where it was not necessary for reasons of safety or security). The Government points to the “dynamic situation” confronting the officers, ECF No. 22 at 9, but fails to explain how moving Flores and positioning him directly outside Room 131 facilitated the investigatory purpose of the detention, in light of the fact that the officers were concerned about interference from other members of Flores’ group, whom they suspected to be inside Room 131. While reasons of safety and security may justify moving a suspect during an investigatory stop, see Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 504-05, 103 S. Ct. 1319, 75 L. Ed. 2d 229 (1983), the Government has not shown how moving Flores to the room thought to contain his fellow drug traffickers was reasonably necessary to safely conduct the investigation.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, including the officers’ use of handcuffs, the seizure of the room key, and the relocation of Flores to the hotel hallway, a reasonable person in Flores’ position would have understood his situation to be tantamount to an arrest. See Jones, 700 F.3d at 624. Therefore, Flores’ detention constituted a de facto arrest.

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.