United States v. Nathaniel Black
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 4251
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- Black was seized when officers retained his ID and began frisking group members after approaching a circle of men at night.
- Troupe openly displayed a firearm; officers seized and searched him, securing the weapon before further detentions.
- Black moved to leave; an officer grabbed his arm, and a firearm fell to the ground during the struggle.
- District court denied suppression; Black pled guilty conditionally and reserved the right to appeal the denial.
- Court reversed and vacated conviction, holding no reasonable suspicion justified Black’s seizure under Terry.
- The opinion discusses Hodari D. versus Mendenhall standards and the shift to totality-of-circumstances analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Black was seized for Fourth Amendment purposes. | Black’s ID retention and frisk of others showed seizure. | Government argues Hodari D. controls until physical restraint. | Black seized when ID retained and companions frisked |
| Whether the seizure was supported by reasonable suspicion. | Presence in high crime area with gun nearby supports suspicion against Black. | Facts are sufficient for reasonable suspicion under totality of circumstances. | No reasonable suspicion; not supported |
| Whether Rule of Two/one-plus rule can justify detention. | Rule used to justify seizure due to firearm proximity. | Rules may justify detention via reasonable suspicion. | Unreliable, cannot justify seizure |
| Whether open carry of a firearm justifies detention. | Open carry is lawful activity; cannot justify seizure. | Open carry relevant to safety concerns and suspicion. | Cannot justify detention |
| Whether unidentified early interactions can be consensual before seizure. | Initial encounters could be consensual. | Authorities’ growing power converted encounter to seizure. | Encounter escalated to seizure; not consensual |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, Bull. S. Ct. 862 (U.S. 1968) (establishes reasonable suspicion standard for investigative detention)
- United States v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (U.S. 1991) (force or submission test; seizure requires restraint)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. 1980) (defining seizure as not free to leave)
- United States v. Weaver, 282 F.3d 302 (4th Cir. 2002) (lengthy encounter factors inform seizure analysis)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (U.S. 2000) (presence in high-crime area alone not enough)
- United States v. Powell, 666 F.3d 180 (4th Cir. 2011) (innocent facts misused to justify suspicion cautioned)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (U.S. 2002) (totality of circumstances framework)
- Des-Roches v. Caprio, 156 F.3d 571 (4th Cir. 1998) (individualized suspicion required for searches)
- Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (U.S. 2007) (Mendenhall yields to totality when behavior ambiguous)
- United States v. King, 990 F.2d 1552 (10th Cir. 1993) (open carry cannot justify detention)