State v. Spears, 802 S.E.2d 803

DEA agents received a tip that one or two Black males traveling from NYC to SC on low-cost "Chinese bus lines" were persons of interest; those buses were known to be used by wanted subjects and drug traffickers.
On March 29, 2012, three plainclothes agents (two with visible guns) observed Spears and a companion disembark, retrieve four large bags, act nervously, look back at the agents, and then walk away; agents followed at a distance and then increased their pace to catch up.
The agents identified themselves and questioned Spears and Williams; Spears produced ID and answered travel questions but hesitated when asked about illegal items.
Agent Tracy repeatedly told Spears not to tuck his hands under his shirt; after warning him three times, Tracy conducted a frisk, felt a rock-like object, removed it, and arrested Spears for trafficking crack cocaine (10–28 g).
Spears moved to suppress the drugs, arguing the encounter was a seizure without reasonable suspicion; the trial court found the encounter consensual and denied suppression. Spears was convicted and sentenced to thirty years.
The court of appeals reversed, holding (1) a reasonable person in Spears’s position would not have felt free to leave (so a Fourth Amendment seizure occurred), and (2) the agents lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion to justify the stop, so the search and seizure violated the Fourth Amendment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the initial encounter was a seizure	Spears: a reasonable person would not feel free to leave because three agents (two armed visibly) followed and then caught up, did not say he was free to go, and questioned him	State: encounter was consensual — Spears and Williams stopped willingly, agents identified themselves, and did not tell them they could not leave	Court: Held seizure occurred — totality (number/armament of officers, pursuit until isolated, questioning about criminal activity, no statement of freedom to leave) indicates a reasonable person would not feel free to leave
Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to stop/detain Spears	Spears: facts (bus known for criminals, four bags, nervous behavior) amount only to a hunch and are insufficiently particularized	State: agents had articulable facts (bus reputation, luggage, nervousness) and could draw reasonable inferences from experience	Court: No reasonable suspicion — presence on that bus, luggage, and nervousness (especially after being followed by armed agents) were insufficiently particularized to justify a Terry stop; suppression required

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes investigatory stop/seizure standard)
United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (reasonable-person test for seizure)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (whether person feels free to decline officer’s requests)
United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (totality of the circumstances for reasonable suspicion)
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (reasonable suspicion is particularized and objective)
Robinson v. State, 407 S.C. 169 (South Carolina standard for reasonable suspicion and seizure)
State v. Anderson, 415 S.C. 441 (presence in high-crime area limited weight; facts there insufficient for reasonable suspicion)