United States v. Antwan Delaney, 955 F.3d 1077

On Dec. 31, 2017 shortly after midnight, two uniformed officers patrolling for New Year’s celebratory gunfire heard repeated shots and began canvassing the area.
After driving about a minute and turning into a narrow, dim parking lot, officers activated their cruiser’s take-down spotlight and stopped a few feet from a backed-in Jeep occupied by Antwan Delaney (driver) and Jalisa Boler (passenger), who were kissing.
The cruiser’s position and light made exiting the lot difficult; officers approached on foot with weapons holstered. Delaney remained in the Jeep and stopped kissing when officers reached the vehicle.
Officer Boockholdt ordered Delaney to open the driver-side door; a firearm was then observed, a struggle ensued, and Delaney was detained and later charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
Delaney moved to suppress the firearm as the product of an unlawful seizure; the district court denied suppression, he was convicted after a stipulated trial, and he appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers’ arrival (parking a few feet away, activating take-down light, partially blocking exit) constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure	Delaney: Yes — show of authority; he submitted by remaining in the car	Government: No — cruiser did not completely block Jeep; Delaney could have left; seizure occurred only when ordered to open door	Seizure occurred when officers pulled into lot, used spotlight, and partially blocked the Jeep; Delaney submitted by staying inside
Whether officers had reasonable, articulable suspicion at the moment of seizure to justify an investigatory stop	Delaney: No — proximity/timing to shots and odd kissing do not particularize suspicion to him	Government: Yes — close-in gunfire minutes earlier, few others seen, occupants’ odd behavior supported suspicion	No reasonable suspicion; government failed to point to specific, particularized facts tying Delaney to the gunfire; stop violated the Fourth Amendment

California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (seizure occurs via physical force or submission to show of authority)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (1991) (reasonable-person "not free to leave" test for show of authority)
United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980) (same-day free-to-leave formulation)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable, articulable suspicion supports brief investigatory detention)
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (passenger is seized when a vehicle is seized; submission by remaining)
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (presence in high-crime area plus evasive behavior can support suspicion)
United States v. Brown, 334 F.3d 1161 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (reasonable suspicion where shots were reported from same parking lot)
United States v. Goddard, 491 F.3d 457 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (police car presence alone insufficient to constitute seizure)
United States v. Castle, 825 F.3d 625 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (factors for determining show of authority and reasonable suspicion)
District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018) (courts must consider the whole picture and avoid excessive technical dissection)