State v. Reeder, 438 P.3d 782

Around 1:30 a.m. an officer found a vehicle running, lights off, with two occupants appearing passed out; he called for backup and parked behind the car without activating lights or siren.
After backup arrived, an officer tapped the passenger-side window and the first officer said, "Post Falls police. Can you roll your window down, please?" The driver said the window was broken; the officer asked, "Can you open the door?"
The district court found the officer’s tone was a question (not a command) and the driver opened the door consensually.
The officer smelled marijuana seconds after the door opened and then searched the passenger (Reeder) and her purse, discovering heroin, marijuana, and paraphernalia.
Reeder moved to suppress, arguing she was unlawfully seized; the district court denied the motion. She entered a conditional guilty plea to two possession counts, preserving the suppression issue on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Reeder)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the district court clearly erred in finding the officer’s tone was a question rather than a command	The officer’s language/tone constituted a command; court’s finding about tone was erroneous	Video and testimony support the district court’s finding the officer’s tone was non‑demanding	No clear error; substantial evidence (testimony + video) supports the district court’s factual finding
Whether the initial encounter was a consensual encounter or a seizure (Fourth Amendment)	A reasonable passenger would not feel free to leave (cannot open door without contacting officer; would be stranded) so the encounter was a seizure requiring suppression	The contact was a consensual encounter; officers did not use show of authority (no lights, no blocking, tone was a question) until odor of marijuana gave reasonable suspicion	The encounter was consensual until the odor of marijuana provided reasonable suspicion; suppression was not required

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Terry allows investigatory stops but distinguishes consensual encounters)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (consensual encounters vs. seizures; test whether a reasonable person would feel free to leave)
Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (consensual approach and limits on seizure)
United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (circumstances indicating seizure, including tone of voice or show of authority)
State v. Willoughby, 147 Idaho 482 (factors like lights/blocking may indicate seizure)
State v. Zubizareta, 122 Idaho 823 (officer approaches car, taps window, brief consensual conversation not a seizure)
State v. Pieper, 163 Idaho 732 (consensual encounter can evolve into detention once reasonable suspicion arises)