Opinion ID: 1924629
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Jones Distinguished

Text: In this case, an anonymous caller reported a man in gray pants dealing drugs in an area that was not known as a high crime area. The police exited their vehicle and requested to speak with Ross. There was no testimony that the police were attempting a pedestrian stop, or that Ross was not free to leave. While walking away from the police, Ross approached an older gentleman, spoke to him and reached out toward him with a cupped hand. The gentleman shook his head and backed away, as Ross continued to push his hand towards him. The officers testified that they were aware that people often cup their hands in the same manner when trying to hide the passing of illegal drugs. It was at this point that the police grabbed Ross by the arm and ordered him to stop. Ross correctly asserts that the standard to determine a seizure, as set forth in Jones, is when a reasonable person would have believed that he is not free to ignore the police presence. [11] In Jones, however, this Court followed the above definition with the ruling that, under that analysis, Jones was seized within the meaning of Section 1902 and Article I, § 6 when Patrolman Echevarria first ordered him to stop and remove his hands from his pockets. [12] Similarly, in this case, the trial judge ruled that a seizure had occurred when Officer Brown ordered Ross to stop and physically restrained him. [13] Jones is distinguishable from this case in that Officers Brown and Villaverde initially approached Ross and merely asked to speak with him as he was walking away. As the United States Supreme Court noted in Terry v. Ohio : Obviously, not all personal intercourse between policemen and citizens involves seizures of persons. Only when the officer, by means of physical force or show of authority, has in some way restrained the liberty of a citizen may we conclude that a `seizure' has occurred. [14] More recently, in Muehler v. Mena , the United States Supreme Court stated: We have held repeatedly that mere police questioning does not constitute a seizure. Even when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual. [15]