''California v. Hodari D.'', 499 U.S. 621 (1991), was a

United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...

case where the Court held that a fleeing suspect is not " seized" under the terms of the Fourth Amendment unless the pursuing officers apply physical force to the suspect or the suspect submits to officers' demands to halt.''California v. Hodari D.'', . Consequently, evidence that is discarded by a fleeing suspect prior to the point in time at which they are seized is not subject to the Fourth Amendment's

exclusionary rule In the United States, the exclusionary rule is a legal rule, based on constitutional law, that prevents evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights from being used in a court of law. This may be consider ...

Background

In April 1988, police officers on patrol in

Oakland, California Oakland is the largest city and the county seat of Alameda County, California, United States. A major West Coast of the United States, West Coast port, Oakland is the largest city in the East Bay region of the San Francisco Bay Area, the third ...

encountered "four or five youths huddled around a small red car." When the youths saw the officers' car approaching, the youths "panicked" and ran down the street. Hodari D. and a companion ran west through an alley, while the others fled south.''California v. Hodari D.'', 499 U.S. at 623. One of the officers chased Hodari D. on foot down an adjoining street, while the other officer chased another youth in the car on a different street. Although Hodari D. " ookedbehind as he ran," he did not see the officer until the officer "was almost upon him, whereupon he tossed away what appeared to be a small rock." A moment later, the officer tackled and handcuffed Hodari D. and placed a radio call for assistance. The rock Hodari D. discarded was later found to be crack cocaine.

Juvenile court proceedings

During proceedings in juvenile court, Hodari D. moved to suppress the rock of cocaine. He argued that officers conducted an unlawful seizure when officers began running toward him and that the evidence was inadmissible because it was obtained in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The juvenile court denied the motion but on appeal, the

California Court of Appeal The California Courts of Appeal are the state intermediate appellate courts in the U.S. state of California. The state is geographically divided along county lines into six appellate districts.

ruled in favor of Hodari D., concluding that Hodari D. was unlawfully seized at the moment officers began the chase. The

California Supreme Court The Supreme Court of California is the highest and final court of appeals in the courts of the U.S. state of California. It is headquartered in San Francisco at the Earl Warren Building, but it regularly holds sessions in Los Angeles and Sac ...

denied California's

petition for review In some jurisdictions, a petition for review is a formal request for an appellate tribunal to review the decision of a lower court or administrative body. If a jurisdiction utilizes petitions for review, then parties seeking appellate review of th ...

, but the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari on October 1, 1990.

Opinion of the Court

Writing for a 7-2 majority,

Justice Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what then constitutes "deserving" being impacted upon by numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspective ...

Antonin Scalia held that the discarded rock of crack cocaine was admissible because Hodari D. was not seized until he was tackled by officers, and he discarded the contraband ''before'' he was seized by officers. Justice Scalia concluded that under the Fourth Amendment, seizure traditionally meant "taking possession" of the person or thing being seized. He noted that "at

common law In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions."The common law is not a brooding omnipres ...

, the word connoted not merely grasping, or applying physical force to, the animate or inanimate object in question, but actually bringing it within physical control." Consequently, he held that a seizure does not occur unless officers apply force to a fleeing suspect or the fleeing suspect yields to an officer's "show of authority" in which the officer orders the fleeing suspect to halt.''California v. Hodari D.'', 499 U.S. at 625-27. In other words, a seizure occurs upon the application of physical force by officers or a submission to an officer's assertion of authority. Justice Scalia ruled that Hodari D. was not seized until he was tackled, and the rock of cocaine was therefore "abandoned" property that was not obtained as a result of an unlawful seizure.

Dissenting opinion of Justice Stevens

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote a

dissenting opinion A dissenting opinion (or dissent) is an opinion in a legal case in certain legal systems written by one or more judges expressing disagreement with the majority opinion of the court which gives rise to its judgment. Dissenting opinions are norm ...

in which he criticized the majority's "narrow construction" of seizures under the Fourth Amendment. Additionally, Justice Stevens criticized the potential consequences of the majority's opinion, writing that the majority "assumes, without acknowledging, that a police officer may now fire his weapon at an innocent citizen and not implicate the Fourth Amendment—as long as he misses his target." He argued that the majority's interpretation of the word "seizure" was a radical departure from the Court's earlier Fourth Amendment jurisprudence and that the officers' demands to halt "adequately conveyed the message that respondent was not free to leave."''California v. Hodari D.'', 499 U.S. at 635-43 (Stevens, J., dissenting).

Notes

References

External links

* {{US4thAmendment, scope, state=expanded United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court 1991 in United States case law