Law of the Case: Brower v. Inyo County, 44 CrL 3175 United States Supreme Court Decided March 21, 1989 (From Crime to Court: Police Officer's Handbook, P 4-9, 1989 Joseph C Coleman)

• NCJ Number: 120935
• Author(s): J C Coleman
• Date Published: 1989
• Length: 6 pages
• Corporate Author: South Carolina Educational Television Network; South Carolina Criminal Justice Acad
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

In ruling on Brower v. Inyo County, the U.S. Supreme Court discussed fourth amendment prohibitions against unreasonable seizures, determined that a seizure had taken place under the facts of the case, and remanded the case to the trial court for a ruling on the reasonableness of the roadblock set up by law enforcement officers in pursuit of a suspected felon.

Abstract

The Court points out that whenever a police officer restrains the freedom of a person to walk away, he has seized the person. However, that seizure must be intentional, and examples are given of police actions that are not seizures under the fourth amendment. Roadblocks, the Court points out, are intended to force the suspect to stop by physical impact if a voluntary stop does not occur. A roadblock can result in a fourth amendment seizure if it can be established that it was an unreasonable seizure. Thus, the trial court was directed to reconsider critical facts, including whether the police cruiser's headlights were so placed as to blind the on-coming suspect, for these could constitute elements of an unreasonable seizure of the suspect.