Court Opinion

ID: 9583972
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:43:24.711575+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:06:14.522833
License: Public Domain

RYAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring in the judgment.
I agree that Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249, 127 S.Ct. 2400, 168 L.Ed.2d 132 (2007), and United States v. McCauley, 548 F.3d 440 (6th Cir.2008), cert. denied, 129 S.Ct. 1601 (2009), require a second look at the question whether Jones was “seized” for Fourth Amendment purposes, as his fellow passengers undisputably were, despite stepping out of the car and standing next to it. That will, in my judgment, require further fact finding by the trial court, particularly as to whether, in emerging from the car, Jones intended to indicate that he was not submitting to the authority of the police officers.
Therefore, I concur in the judgment to reverse and remand.