Document: 127 S. Ct. 2400 (2007) Bruce Edward BRENDLIN, Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA. No. 06-8120. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 23, 2007. Decided June 18, *2403 Elizabeth M. Campbell, appointed by this Court, Sacramento, CA, for the petitioner. Clifford E. Zall, respondent. Jeffrey T. Green, Richard A. Kaplan, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, D.C., Sarah O'Rourke Schrup, Northwestern University, Practicum, Chicago, IL, Counsel Record, Petitioner. Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General California, Manuel Medeiros, State Solicitor General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Michael P. Farrell, Senior Donald De Nicola, Deputy Solicitor, Canzoneri, Supervising Doris Calandra, Respondent. Justice SOUTER delivered opinion Court. When a police officer makes traffic stop, driver car is seized within meaning Fourth Amendment. The question in case whether same true passenger. We hold that passenger as well and so may challenge constitutionality stop. I Early morning November 27, 2001, Sheriff Robert Brokenbrough his partner saw parked Buick with expired registration tags. In ensuing conversation dispatcher, *2404 learned an application renewal was being processed. officers again on road, time noticed its display temporary operating permit number "11," indicating it legal to drive through November. App. 115. decided pull over verify matched vehicle, even though, admitted later, there nothing unusual about or way affixed. asked driver, Karen Simeroth, her license front seat, petitioner Brendlin, whom he recognized "one Brendlin brothers." Id., at 65. He recalled either Scott had dropped out parole supervision identify himself.[1] returned cruiser, called backup, verified violator outstanding no-bail warrant arrest. While patrol car, briefly open then close door Buick. Once reinforcements arrived, went side Buick, ordered him gunpoint, declared under searched incident arrest, they found orange syringe cap person. A patdown search Simeroth revealed syringes plastic bag green leafy substance, she also formally arrested. Officers tubing, scale, other things used produce methamphetamine. charged possession manufacture methamphetamine, moved suppress evidence obtained searches person fruits unconstitutional seizure, arguing lacked probable cause reasonable suspicion make did not assert Amendment rights were violated Simeroth's cf. Rakas Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 99 421, 58 L. Ed. 2d 387 (1978), but claimed only stop unlawful seizure trial court denied suppression motion after finding lawful until arrested him. pleaded guilty, subject appeal issue, sentenced four years prison. California Appeal reversed denial motion, holding which held unlawful. 8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 882 (2004) (officially depublished). By narrow majority, reversed. noted California's concession no basis suspect operation 38 4th 1107, 1114, 45 50, 136 P.3d 845, 848 (2006),[2] still unwarranted because "is constitutional matter absence additional circumstances would indicate peace *2405 officer's investigation show authority," id., 1111, P.3d, 846. reasoned exclusive target, 1118, 851, cannot submit authority while controls 1118-1119, 851-852, once has been pulled off "would feel free depart otherwise conduct affairs though present," 1119, 852. dissent, Corrigan said entails when sole target detained purpose ensuring safety leave without permission. 1125, 856. granted certiorari decide subjects passenger, 549 ___, 1145, 166 910 (2007). now vacate. II thus entitled government's action officer, "`by means physical force authority,'" terminates restrains freedom movement, Florida Bostick, 501 429, 434, 111 2382, 115 389 (1991) (quoting Terry Ohio, 392 1, 19, n. 16, 88 1868, 20 889 (1968)), "through intentionally applied," Brower County Inyo, 489 593, 597, 109 1378, 103 628 (1989) (emphasis original). Thus, "unintended ... [may be] object detention," long detention "willful" merely consequence "an unknowing act." 596, 1378; Sacramento Lewis, 523 833, 844, 118 1708, 140 1043 (1998) (no where accidentally struck killed motorcycle during high-speed pursuit). use force, actual submission; otherwise, most attempted far concerned. See Hodari D., 499 621, 626, 2, 1547, 113 690 (1991); supra, 7, 1708. actions do unambiguous intent restrain individual's submission governmental takes form passive acquiescence, needs be some test telling occurs response authority, does not. devised Stewart States Mendenhall, 446 544, 100 1870, 64 497 (1980), who wrote if "in view all surrounding incident, have believed leave," 554, 1870 (principal opinion). Later on, adopted Stewart's touchstone, see, e.g., 627, 1547; Michigan Chesternut, 486 567, 573, 108 1975, 565 (1988); INS Delgado, 466 210, 215, 104 1758, 80 247 (1984), added "has desire leave" reasons unrelated presence, "coercive effect encounter" can measured better asking "a *2406 decline officers' requests terminate encounter," 435-436, 2382; see Drayton, 536 194, 202, 122 2105, 153 242 (2002). law settled terms "even limited resulting quite brief." Delaware Prouse, 440 648, 653, 1391, 59 660 (1979); Whren States, 517 806, 809-810, 116 1769, 135 89 (1996). And although we not, today, squarely answered seized, dicta seizes everyone just driver. See, 1391 ("[S]topping automobile detaining occupants constitute `seizure' [the Fourteenth] Amendments"); Colorado Bannister, 449 4, 3, 101 42, 66 1 (1980) (per curiam) ("There stopping vehicle Amendment"); Berkemer McCarty, 468 420, 436-437, 3138, 82 317 (1984) ("[W]e acknowledged seizure" (internal quotation marks omitted)); Hensley, 469 221, 226, 105 675, 83 604 (1985) seizure"); Whren, 1769 ("Temporary individuals police, brief period purpose, constitutes `persons' Amendment]"). come closest here two cases dealing neither any distinction between affect analysis. Prouse considered grounds road Prouse's properly granted. spoke arresting testimony back seat over, U.S., 650, described occupant, referred car's "occupants" 1391. Justification issue passed upon petitioners drug course 809, 1769. Both illegally stopped car; agreed rested cause. 819, B concedes adequate justification argues claim tainted resolve Brendlin's position himself "terminate himself. 436, 2382. think these *2407 understood exercising control point one necessarily curtails travel chosen much halts diverting both from stream activity normally amounts intrusion "privacy personal security" (and here) distinguish Martinez-Fuerte, 428 543, 96 3074, 49 1116 (1976). An orders particular acts implicit right based fault sort, sensible expect allow people go freely focal into faulty behavior wrongdoing. If likely wrongdoing driving, will reasonably owing association; bad scrutiny, attempt scene obviously prompt objection first place. Cf. 197-199, 203-204, 2105 (finding boarded stationary bus passengers permission drugs).[3] It crime, let move around ways could jeopardize safety. Maryland Wilson, 519 408, 117 882, 137 41 (1997), order precautionary measure, poses risk. 414-415, 882; Pennsylvania Mimms, 434 106, 98 330, 54 331 (1977) (driver course). fashioning rule, invoked our earlier statement "`[t]he risk harm minimized routinely exercise unquestioned command situation.'" 414, Summers, 452 692, 702-703, 2587, 69 340 (1981)). What opinions probably reflects societal expectation "`unquestioned [police] command'" odds notion leave, encounter way, advance 882.[4] Our conclusion comports views nine Federal Courts Appeals, nearly every state court, ruled *2408 question. Kimball, 25 F.3d 5 (C.A.1 1994); Mosley, 454 249, 253 (C.A.3 2006); Rusher, 966 F.2d 868, 874, 4 (C.A.4 1992); Grant, 349 192, 196 (C.A.5 2003); Perez, 363, 369 (C.A.6 Powell, 929 1190, 1195 (C.A.7 1991); Ameling, 328 443, 446-447, 3 (C.A.8 Twilley, 222 1092, 1095 (C.A.9 2000); Eylicio-Montoya, 70 1158, 1163-1164 (C.A.10 1995); Bowers, 334 Ark. 447, 451-452, 976 S.W.2d 379, 381-382 (1998); Haworth, 106 Idaho 405, 405-406, 679 P.2d 1123, 1123-1124 (1984); People Bunch, 207 Ill. 13, 277 Dec. 658, 796 N.E.2d 1024, 1029 (2003); Eis, 348 N.W.2d 224, 226 (Iowa 1984); Hodges, 252 Kan. 989, 1002-1005, 851 352, 361-362 (1993); Carter, Ohio St. 57, 63, 630 355, 360 (1994) curiam); Harris, 206 Wis. 243, 253-258, 557 245, 249-251 treatise writers share prevailing judicial bring legality 6 W. LaFave, Search Seizure § 11.3(e), pp. 195, (4th ed.2004 Supp.2007) ("If length passenger's thereafter, removal are unreasonable sense, surely standing those violations suppressed their fruit" (footnote Ringel, Searches & Seizures, Arrests Confessions 11:20, p. 11-98 (2d ed. 2007) ("[A] enforcement results passenger").[5] C contrary drawn came formal three premises respectfully disagree. First, intended investigate direct toward Brendlin. Brokenbrough's "flashing lights [as] directed driver," pointed lack record "was aware [Brendlin] prior stop." Cal.4th, 851. But facts ignores objective Mendenhall what understand. To extent anything ambiguous (was fairly seen occupants?), resolves ambiguity, leads intuitive like successful authority. Court's approach, contrary, shifts objectively manifested motive taking intentional repeatedly rejected attempts introduce kind subjectivity 813, ("Subjective intentions play role ordinary, probable-cause analysis"); 575, 1975 ("[T]he subjective *2409 relevant assessment implications conveyed confronted"); 6, opinion) (disregarding Government agent's detain Mendenhall); Rakas, 132-135, 421 (rejecting "target theory" standing, allowed "any criminal defendant directed" omitted)). defends ruling citing requires purposeful, deliberate act detention. Brief Respondent 9-14. answers argument. counts "intent [that] confronted," criterion willful restriction movement invitation look determining seized. recent accord point. 1043, occurred ran fallen chase, took place, stressed Lewis's crashing him, applied." 1708 deleted). consider, alone emphasize, possibility meant Nor Brower, 628, dispositive "Brower obstacle roadblockand stopped." 599, 1378. reads language suggest specific occupant must motivating 12, thrust observation someone else, "meant applied"; another made sense too collided roadblock. Neither case, then, perceived least partly ignore presence business. Second, assumed "as ability deputy's authority" moving vehicle. amount depends doing before authority: fleeing man physically overpowered, sitting chair getting up run away. Here, effective signal roadway, could, apparently did, staying inside. Third, shied away rule apply today fear encompass motorists following who, virtue original detention, forced slow down perhaps halt accommodate vehicle's authority." 1120, *2410 Rptr.3d 853. knows stuck (like motorist can't why suddenly clogged) perceive car. Such incidental restrictions tend "sense security privacy traveling automobile." 662, consequential blockage call avoid "arbitrary oppressive interference [law] officials individuals" limit. 3074.[6] Indeed, worry flow conclusion, almost courts rejected. Holding private (without more) invite cars regardless illegal.[7] fact uncovered result arbitrary admissible against powerful incentive "roving patrols" violate driver's right. Almeida-Sanchez 413 266, 273, 93 2535, 37 596 (1973) (stop Border Patrol agents Amendment); 663, (police spot check Amendment). * moment error deny ground consider instance turns issue. judgment vacated, remanded further proceedings inconsistent opinion. ordered. NOTES [1] parties dispute accuracy transcript hearing disagree gave name false "Bruce Brown." [2] conceded justify "`vehicle expected permit.'" S123133 (Sup.Ct. Cal.), 24). [3] Of course, solely conduct. Rodriguez-Diaz, 161 F. Supp. 629, (D.Md.2001) (passenger's violation local seatbelt law); Roth, 85 571, 573 (Colo.App.2003) littering ordinance). Accordingly, assume, [4] Although inferred decision "awar[e] available options," 852 (2006), equally taken felt compelled remain inside event, understood. [5] Only Courts, than California's, stood tide Jackson, 39 1174, 1184-1186 (Colo.2002) (en banc); Mendez, Wash.2d 208, 222-223, 970 722, 729 (1999) banc). [6] claims that, today's "all taxi cab `seized' running red light." 23. relationship common carrier expectations differ accordingly. cases, here, crucial take steps encounter. [7] Compare (1979) (requiring "at articulable suspicion" support random, investigative stops), Brignoni-Ponce, 422 873, 880-884, 95 2574, 607 (1975) (same), 810, (1996) believe occurred"), Atwater Lago Vista, 532 318, 354, 121 1536, 149 (2001) individual committed very minor offense may, violating Amendment, arrest offender").

Category: 0