City of Santa Fe v. Schirmer, 35,718

Defendant Schirmer was stopped by a Santa Fe sergeant while attempting to parallel park; the sergeant activated only his rear emergency lights and approached on foot.
The sergeant asked Defendant if everything was okay; there was no ordering, physical touching, display of weapon, or multiple officers present.
Defendant moved to suppress evidence, arguing the encounter was a seizure (not consensual) because a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave.
The municipal court denied the motion; Defendant preserved the suppression issue via a conditional plea and appealed to the district court, which denied the motion, and Defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals issued a proposed disposition finding insufficient show of force to constitute a seizure and, after briefing, affirmed the denial of suppression.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the officer’s approach and rear lights constituted a seizure (vs. consensual encounter)	City: Officer’s limited conduct (rear lights, approach, asking if OK) did not convey that compliance was required; no seizure	Schirmer: Totality of circumstances and factors from precedents would make a reasonable person feel not free to leave; lights and approach indicated seizure	Held: No seizure; officer’s conduct resembled a caretaker/deferential inquiry, not a show of authority requiring compliance

State v. Walters, 123 N.M. 88, 934 P.2d 282 (N.M. Ct. App.) (consensual encounter vs. seizure standard; seizure requires show of authority or force)
State v. Baldonado, 115 N.M. 106, 847 P.2d 751 (N.M. Ct. App.) (distinguishes accusatory stops from deferential welfare checks when officers activate lights behind a stopped car)
State v. Murry, 318 P.3d 180 (N.M. Ct. App.) (officer orders, multiple officers, weapons, or tone can indicate seizure)
State v. Garcia, 147 N.M. 134, 217 P.3d 1032 (N.M.) (seizure where officer ordered defendant to stop and used commanding conduct)
State v. Soto, 143 N.M. 631, 179 P.3d 1239 (N.M. Ct. App.) (seizure where patrol car pulled up beside defendant and officers questioned and requested ID)
State v. Jason L., 129 N.M. 119, 2 P.3d 856 (N.M.) (factors for whether a reasonable person would believe they were free to leave)