Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/321207357/United-States-v-Nathaniel-Black-4th-Cir-2013
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 06:04:20+00:00

Document:
for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney, District Judge.
GREGORY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Traxler wrote a separate opinion concurring in the result.
Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
complexes in the Eastway Division are known for armed robberies and other violent crimes.
parking lot located in between two apartment complexes.
react. Neither officer observed the men engaging in any criminal activity.
a different call and later joined the first four officers.
as there are instances where a second gun is not always recovered.
up to the locale of the police encounter with the men.
was visiting some friends in the area.
this encounter as "extremely cooperative."
Moses, Officer Zastrow noticed that Black became "fidgety,"
the individual seeks a path to escape.
obtained physical ID from Troupe and Moses.
leave?" and continued walking away.
Zastrow placed Black in handcuffs and arrested him.
of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
imprisonment and three years of supervised release.
we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1291.
suppress for clear error, and the legal determinations de novo.
United States v. Cain, 524 F.3d 477, 481 (4th Cir. 2008).
personal security of individuals." I.N.S. v. Delgado, 466 U.S.
428 U.S. 543, 554 (1976)).
the case before us, we first consider when Black was "seized"
standard set forth in Terry.
883 F.2d 320, 322 (4th Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v.
show of governmental authority takes the form of passive acquiescence,"
thus, Mendenhall, as opposed to Hodari D. applies.
282 F.3d at 310 (emphasis added).
vehicle returned along with another marked police vehicle.
quickly increased to six uniformed officers, and then seven.
Strayer frisked other men in the group. See id.
to terminate an illegal seizure.
United States v. Jones, 678 F.3d 293, 299, 301-04 (4th Cir.
determine whether he was seized at any point prior to this.
We next consider whether Blacks seizure was reasonable.
reasonable suspicion merely by association.
F.3d 480, 492 (4th Cir. 2011), and see no need to further address it.
Cir. 2011); Massenburg, 654 F.3d 480; United States v.
suspicion for a Terry stop, United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S.
relied on to establish reasonable suspicion.
finding is unsupported by the officers own testimonies.
vehicle at a gas station is suspicious is unreasonable.
standing alone, sufficient to create reasonable suspicion."
privacy expectations against the government interests. Id.
suppress the normal requirement of individualized suspicion.
to possess a firearm." We are not persuaded.
dichotomy in the intrusion of constitutional protections.
not particularized as to Black, and we refuse to find reasonable suspicion merely by association.
in the field." Id. at 655 (citation and quotation marks omitted).
arbitrary and boundless rule, it cannot be a basis for reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
the proposition that "a surprisingly high level of cooperation"
of objective justification needed for a detention or seizure."
interact with officers with the perfect amount of graceful disdain.
analysis are that the men were in a high crime area at night.
a certain race or class of people. We denounce such an assertion.
Amendment rights of all individuals are protected.
ruling, and vacate Blacks conviction and sentence.
I concur in the result reached by the majority.
PNB v. Dee, et al.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.