Page 65 - March April 2020 TPA
P. 65

(2002). Both of these cases shed light on when       person would feel free to decline the officers’
        questioning a bus passenger may constitute an        requests or otherwise terminate the encounter.”
        unconstitutional seizure.                            The Court explained that “no seizure occurs when
        The Supreme Court in Bostick evaluated a situation   police ask questions of an individual, ask to
        where uniformed police officers boarded a bus,       examine the individual’s identification, and request
        questioned a defendant (absent suspicion), and then  consent to search his or her luggage—so long as
        sought the defendant’s consent to search his         the officers do not convey a message that
        luggage.                                             compliance with their requests is required.”  As the
        The Court began its analysis by clarifying that “a   Court noted, “the mere fact that [the respondent]
        seizure does not occur simply because a police officer  did not feel free to leave the bus does not mean that
        approaches an individual and asks a few questions.”  the police seized him.”   The Court understood that
        Instead, an encounter is “consensual” so long as the
                                                             the respondent’s movements were confined
        civilian would feel free to either terminate the encounter  because he was on a bus.  But it concluded that
        or disregard the questioning. The police do not need  “this was the natural result of his decision to take
        reasonable suspicion to approach someone for
                                                             the bus; it says nothing about whether or not the
        questioning.  And “[t]he encounter will not trigger
                                                             police conduct at issue was coercive.”
        Fourth  Amendment scrutiny unless it loses its
        consensual nature.”                                  The  Drayton  Court evaluated whether police
        6 Wise also asserts that the police lacked reasonable  officers who boarded a Greyhound and questioned
        suspicion to question him during the bus encounter.  certain passengers had unconstitutionally seized the
        However, the police did not need  any  suspicion to  passengers whom they questioned.    During a
        question him in the manner they did. See Drayton, 536  scheduled stop, police boarded a Greyhound bus as
        U.S. at 201 (“Even when law enforcement officers have  part of a routine drug and weapons interdiction
        no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may  effort.   “The officers were dressed in plain clothes
        pose questions, ask for identification, and request
                                                             and carried concealed weapons and visible
        consent to search luggage—provided they do not induce
                                                             badges.”  Three officers boarded the bus.  One
        cooperation by coercive means.”) (citation omitted).
                                                             officer kneeled on the driver’s seat and faced the
        The respondent in Bostick argued that questioning
                                                             passengers, so he could monitor them.   Another
        that occurs “in the cramped confines of a bus” is
                                                             officer stationed himself in the rear of the bus. A
        “much more intimidating” because “police tower
                                                             third officer walked down the aisle, questioning
        over a seated passenger and there is little room to
                                                             passengers.  While questioning passengers, the
        move around.”  Under those conditions, “a
                                                             officer avoided blocking the aisle by standing “next
        reasonable bus passenger would not have felt free
                                                             to or just behind each passenger with whom [the
        to leave” while the police were on board and
                                                             officer] spoke.”  One officer approached two
        questioning the passenger “because there is
                                                             individuals who were sitting next to one another.
        nowhere to go on a bus.”   The respondent
                                                             The officer showed the individuals his police
        successfully persuaded the court below to adopt a
                                                             badge.   Then, speaking in a conversational tone,
        per se rule prohibiting police officers from
                                                             he identified himself and asked to search the
        randomly boarding buses and questioning
                                                             passengers’ luggage.  The passengers consented to
        passengers as a means of performing drug
                                                             the search.  After the luggage search, the officer
        interdictions.   The Supreme Court, however,
                                                             asked to search the person of one of the passengers.
        disagreed that randomly questioning a bus
                                                             The passenger consented.  The officer felt hard
        passenger constitutes a per se unreasonable seizure.
                                                             objects on the passenger’s upper thighs; he believed
        The proper inquiry for whether a bus passenger has
                                                             these were drug packages.  He then arrested the
        been seized by police is “whether a reasonable
                                                             passenger.  A similar process transpired with the
        58                 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140             Texas Police Journal
   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70