United States v. Gallinger, 227 F. Supp. 3d 1163

Background

Late-night 911 hang-up call traced to vicinity of Amber Street in Boise; dispatch heard scuffling and voices but gave no clear report of a crime or suspect identity.
Officer Logan Terry arrived, saw Gallinger near the alley, ordered him to sit on the curb; Gallinger gave a false name (“Steven Cox”).
Officer Joseph Martinez arrived, learned from the 911 caller that a man with a bandana had approached the caller and been given $9 to leave; Martinez knew Gallinger from prior contacts and thought the caller’s report suspicious.
Martinez asked to pat-search Gallinger; Gallinger refused. Martinez then announced an arrest for providing a false name, and Gallinger fled on foot.
During flight/after apprehension officers recovered a handgun allegedly discarded by Gallinger; Gallinger was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and moved to suppress the gun as fruit of an unlawful seizure.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Officer Terry’s initial contact was a seizure under the Fourth Amendment	Gallinger: ordering him to sit on the curb was a show of authority that restrained his liberty and thus a seizure	Government: encounter was consensual; Gallinger voluntarily remained and was not seized	Court: It was a seizure — a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave when ordered to sit near a uniformed officer by his patrol car
Whether the seizure was supported by reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop	Gallinger: no particularized facts linked him to criminal activity; proximity to a hang-up call is insufficient	Government: hang-up call, late hour, proximity to call location, and suspicious clothing created reasonable suspicion	Court: No reasonable suspicion — the 911 hang-up lacked indicia identifying criminal activity or the suspect; presence in the area was not enough
Whether the gun should be suppressed as fruit of the unlawful seizure	Gallinger: firearm resulted from illegal stop and must be excluded under the exclusionary rule	Government: attenuation — defendant’s flight and subsequent information from the 911 caller broke the causal chain	Court: No attenuation — short time lapse, flight flowed from the illegal seizure (not an independent voluntary act), and intervening information was obtained while Gallinger was illegally detained; suppression required
Whether any good-faith or other exceptions save the evidence	N/A	Government: argued later events and officer conduct justified admitting evidence	Court: Officer acted in good faith but detention was investigative in purpose; that does not prevent exclusion when seizure lacked reasonable suspicion

Key Cases Cited

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (established standard for brief investigative stops requiring reasonable suspicion)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (consensual encounters vs. seizures; person must feel free to decline and leave)
California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (submission to show of authority required for seizure via show of authority)
Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (anonymous tip lacking indicia of reliability insufficient to justify a stop)
Navarette v. California, 134 S. Ct. 1683 (even reliable tips must yield reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify stop)
Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (restraint on freedom to leave constitutes a seizure)
Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 (attenuation test: temporal proximity, intervening circumstances, and purpose/flagrancy of official misconduct)
New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14 (discusses derivative evidence rule applicability)
United States v. Montero-Camargo, 208 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir.) (definition of reasonable suspicion as particularized and articulable)