P. v. Aquino CA4/3
This case turns on the distinction between a consensual encounter and a detention for purposes of the Fourth Amendment. It arose out of a contact that occurred between appellant and the police early one morning in the City of Stanton. There is no dispute the statements appellant made during the contact provided reasonable suspicion to believe he was involved in criminal activity. The only question is whether the police had already detained appellant by the time he made those statements. We think not. Because the police did not detain appellant until after they had reasonable suspicion to do so, the trial court properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress, and we affirm the judgment against him.
Comments on P. v. Aquino CA4/3