United States v. Jaquan Taylor
670 F. App'x 638
9th Cir.2016Background
- Defendant Jaquan Taylor was convicted after a stipulated-facts bench trial for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
- Police approached a group of 6–10 men in a well-lit area; officers were civil and did not have guns drawn.
- One person in the group stated none were on parole and refused a search; immediately thereafter Taylor suddenly sprinted away and was the only person who ran.
- An officer tackled Taylor; a gun and ammunition slipped from his waistband during the tackle and were seized.
- Taylor moved to suppress the gun and ammo, arguing they were fruits of an unconstitutional seizure because officers lacked reasonable suspicion to stop or detain him.
- The district court denied suppression, finding reasonable suspicion based on the headlong flight, the context (recent gang-related funeral/tensions), and Taylor being the sole person who fled; the Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to detain Taylor after he fled | Government: flight in context (time/place, recent gang funeral, only person fleeing) gave officers particularized, objective basis to detain | Taylor: police lacked reasonable suspicion; detention and seizure of gun were unconstitutional | Court held officers had reasonable suspicion; suppression denied and conviction affirmed |
| Whether flight by an African-American suspect can ever contribute to reasonable suspicion | Government: flight may support reasonable suspicion under totality of circumstances | Taylor: flight by African-Americans is often motivated by fear of police and should not be per se used for suspicion | Court rejected a per se rule; followed Wardlow that flight can be suspicious depending on context |
| Whether items were not "seized" so cannot be fruits of illegal seizure (argument raised by government on appeal) | Government (on appeal): argues Taylor was not seized before items fell | Taylor: trial court treated the tackle as a seizure producing the evidence | Court found government waived this argument by not raising it below; did not decide the merits |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Cotterman, 709 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2013) (reasonable-suspicion standard and appellate review framework)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (headlong flight can contribute to reasonable suspicion)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (review of reasonable-suspicion determinations de novo with deference to factual findings)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Flores-Payon, 942 F.2d 556 (9th Cir. 1991) (argument raised first on appeal is waived)
- United States v. Valdes-Vega, 738 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2013) (innocent acts can still contribute to reasonable suspicion in context)
AFFIRMED.