Opinion ID: 2824888
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Detention of a Driver in a Stopped Vehicle

Text: Here we consider two questions. One, when an officer approaches a motorist in a parked car, what differentiates between a consensual encounter and a detention? Two, what is required to demonstrate submission to a show of authority? In People v. Bailey (1985) 176 Cal.App.3d 402 (Bailey) an officer stopped behind the defendant’s parked car and activated his emergency lights. (Id. at p. 404.) Applying the test from United States v. Mendenhall (1980) 446 U.S. 544, 554 (Mendenhall), the court concluded a detention had occurred because “[a] reasonable person to whom the red light from a vehicle is directed would be expected to recognize the signal to stop or otherwise be available to the officer. Any reasonable person in a similar situation would expect that if he drove off, the officer would respond by following with red light on and siren sounding in order to accomplish control of the individual.” (Bailey, at pp. 405-406.)1 The Court of Appeal here faulted Bailey for overlooking a critical point. Relying on California v. Hodari D. (1991) 499 U.S. 621 (Hodari D.), it held that “there needs to be some evidence that the person yielded to that show of authority. In the case of a stopped vehicle approached by police, we believe there must be something more than merely activating the red lights to accomplish a detention,