905 F.3d 676
3rd Cir.2018Background
- On Sept. 22, 2014, an anonymous 911 caller reported a Hispanic male pointing a gun near a vacant shop block in Philadelphia; caller described clothing matching De Castro.
- Officer John Mulqueeney, familiar with the high-crime area, arrived alone and approached De Castro (15–20 feet away) who turned toward the officer.
- From approximately 5–10 feet, Mulqueeney politely asked De Castro to remove his hands from his pockets; De Castro complied, revealing a pistol grip and then a loaded firearm.
- Mulqueeney handcuffed De Castro, frisked him, and recovered a loaded magazine; De Castro was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(A).
- The District Court denied De Castro’s motion to suppress, finding the request to remove hands was not a Fourth Amendment seizure (and alternatively, that reasonable suspicion existed); De Castro pleaded guilty, appealed, and sought suppression review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an officer’s polite request that a person remove hands from pockets constitutes a Fourth Amendment "seizure" (investigatory detention) | De Castro: even a polite request can be a show of authority if a reasonable person would not feel free to refuse; publicized police encounters make refusal dangerous | Government (and District Court): the single, conversational safety request by a lone officer, with no weapon drawn or threats, is a consensual encounter, not a seizure | Court: Request was not a seizure under the Fourth Amendment; evidence admissible (alternative reasonable-suspicion ruling unnecessary) |
| If the request were a seizure, whether it was supported by reasonable suspicion | De Castro: initial encounter lacked particularized suspicion to detain | Government: officer had facts (anonymous report, matching description, high-crime area) supporting reasonable suspicion | Court: did not reach necessity of this holding (denied suppression because no seizure); District Court had alternatively found reasonable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Givan, 320 F.3d 452 (3d Cir. 2003) (plenary review of legal question when district facts undisputed)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983) (approach and questioning in public not automatically a seizure; confrontation can become a seizure if show of authority restrains movement)
- INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (1984) (police questioning and requests for ID do not automatically constitute a seizure absent intimidating circumstances)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980) (seizure occurs by physical force or show of authority; objective "would a reasonable person feel free to leave" test)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (test for "show of authority" is objective; person is seized when they yield to the show of authority)
- United States v. Brown, 765 F.3d 278 (3d Cir. 2014) (distinguishing consensual approach from seizures; catalogues factors relevant to consensual encounters)
- United States v. Barnes, 496 A.2d 1040 (D.C. 1985) (officer’s request to remove hands from pockets deemed a consensual encounter where no intimidating conduct was present)