12 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Younggreen2 sentences2019State v. Young, 135 Wn.2d 498 , 957 P.2d 681 (1998). 2019State v. Young, 135 Wn.2d 498 , 957 P.2d 681 (1998). | 2 | 5 |
United States v. James Buchanon (94-3551), William Reed, Jr. (94-3660)green2 sentences2009Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir. 2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir. 1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the threatening presence alone could not crea 2009App.3d 822 , 909 N.E.2d 232, 243 , 330 Ill.Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir.2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir.1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2009Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir. 2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir. 1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the threatening presence alone could not crea 2009App.3d 822 , 909 N.E.2d 232, 243 , 330 Ill.Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir.2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir.1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the | 2 | 2 |
State v. Larsongreen2 sentences2004See id. at 640 ; O’Neill, 148 Wn.2d at 580 n.4. 2004See id. at 640 ; O’Neill, 148 Wn.2d at 580 n.4. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Younggreen2 sentences2019State v. Young, 135 Wn.2d 498 , 957 P.2d 681 (1998). 2019State v. Young, 135 Wn.2d 498 , 957 P.2d 681 (1998). | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Mendenhall
green
2 sentences2018Under the Mendenhall test for determining whether a seizure occurred, “‘[N]ot every encounter between a police officer and a citizen is an intrusion requiring an objective justification.’” Rankin, 151 Wn.2d at 695 (quoting Mendenhall, 446 U.S. at 553 ). 2018Under the Mendenhall test for determining whether a seizure occurred, “‘[N]ot every encounter between a police officer and a citizen is an intrusion requiring an objective justification.’” Rankin, 151 Wn.2d at 695 (quoting Mendenhall, 446 U.S. at 553 ). | 3 | 2004–2018 |
State v. Stroud
green
2 sentences2018There is a 'seizure' when, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave." State v. Stroud, 30 Wn. 2018There is a 'seizure' when, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave." State v. Stroud, 30 Wn. | 2 | 2017–2018 |
State v. Rankin
green
2 sentences2018Under the Mendenhall test for determining whether a seizure occurred, “‘[N]ot every encounter between a police officer and a citizen is an intrusion requiring an objective justification.’” Rankin, 151 Wn.2d at 695 (quoting Mendenhall, 446 U.S. at 553 ). 2018Under the Mendenhall test for determining whether a seizure occurred, “‘[N]ot every encounter between a police officer and a citizen is an intrusion requiring an objective justification.’” Rankin, 151 Wn.2d at 695 (quoting Mendenhall, 446 U.S. at 553 ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Nettles
green
2 sentences2013Although Morris's partner was present in the transit tunnel, it is undisputed that DR saw only Morris at the time of the 9 For example, no seizure occurred when an officer parked her patrol car, exited, and called out to a group of men, "'Gentlemen, I'd like to speak with you, could you come to my car?'" Nettles, 70 Wn. 2013Although Morris's partner was present in the transit tunnel, it is undisputed that DR saw only Morris at the time of the 9 For example, no seizure occurred when an officer parked her patrol car, exited, and called out to a group of men, "'Gentlemen, I'd like to speak with you, could you come to my car?'" Nettles, 70 Wn. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
People v. Robinson
green
2 sentences2009App.3d 822 , 909 N.E.2d 232, 243 , 330 Ill.Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir.2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir.1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the 2009App.3d 822 , 909 N.E.2d 232, 243 , 330 Ill.Dec. 519 (2009) (applying Mendenhall factors, the Appellate Court of Illinois concluded three officers standing next to suspect did not constitute a seizure); United States v. Jones, 523 F.3d 1235, 1237, 1242 (10th Cir.2008) (no seizure when one officer spoke with suspect while three other officers hovered nearby); United States v. Buchanon, 72 F.3d 1217, 1224 (6th Cir.1995) (arrival of three additional officers, with emergency lights blazing, minutes after initial traffic stop was a threatening presence, but without additional Mendenhall factors the | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. O'Neill
green
2 sentences2004See id. at 640 ; O’Neill, 148 Wn.2d at 580 n.4. 2004See id. at 640 ; O’Neill, 148 Wn.2d at 580 n.4. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State v. O'NEILL
green
2 sentences2004See id. at 640, 611 P.2d 771 ; O'Neill, 148 Wash.2d at 580 n. 4, 62 P.3d 489 . 2004See id. at 640, 611 P.2d 771 ; O'Neill, 148 Wash.2d at 580 n. 4, 62 P.3d 489 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
California v. Hodari D.
green
2 sentences1997The Mendenhall analysis above, however, establishes "a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for seizure.” California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621, 628 , 111 S. Ct. 1547 , 113 L. 1997The Mendenhall analysis above, however, establishes "a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for seizure.” California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621, 628 , 111 S. Ct. 1547 , 113 L. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.