United States v. Sonny Phillips
677 F. App'x 294
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- On Sept. 8, 2014, Detroit officers on patrol shone spotlights on Sonny Phillips, who was walking alongside parked cars at night.
- Officers slowed, saw the handle of a black handgun protruding from Phillips’s pocket, exited the patrol car to investigate, and Phillips fled before they spoke to him.
- During the chase, the handgun fell from Phillips’s pocket; one officer retrieved the gun while others continued to pursue and arrest Phillips.
- Phillips was charged as a felon-in-possession and moved to suppress the firearm as fruit of an unlawful seizure; the district court denied the motion.
- Phillips pleaded guilty conditionally to preserve his right to appeal the denial of the suppression motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether police conduct (exiting vehicle and ordering Phillips to stop) constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure making the later retrieval of the gun unlawful | Phillips argued the officers’ show of authority seized him, so the gun recovered thereafter must be suppressed | Government argued no seizure occurred because Phillips fled (Hodari D.); evidence dropped during flight is not product of a seizure | Court held no seizure of Phillips occurred under Hodari D.; the gun dropped during flight is admissible |
| Whether Phillips’ dropping of the gun was distinguishable from Hodari D. because it was inadvertent rather than intentional abandonment | Phillips argued Hodari D. involved intentional abandonment, so his inadvertent drop should be treated differently | Government relied on precedent treating both dropping and throwing away items as abandonment and on expectation-of-privacy analysis | Court rejected the distinction: dropping in public forfeited any reasonable expectation of privacy, so officers’ seizure of the gun was reasonable |
| Whether initial lack of reasonable suspicion to stop Phillips (if any) taints the seizure of the gun | Phillips contended the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to treat him as engaged in criminal activity, so subsequent evidence is tainted | Government pointed to Sixth Circuit precedent that Hodari D. applies even if prior police conduct was improper | Court agreed Hodari D. applies despite alleged prior misconduct; no suppression warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (fleeing suspect who discards evidence is not "seized" and discarded evidence is not the product of a seizure)
- United States v. Jeter, 721 F.3d 746 (6th Cir. 2013) (defining seizure as physical force or a show of authority that causes submission)
- United States v. Martin, 399 F.3d 750 (6th Cir. 2005) (Hodari D. applies even if attempted seizure or show of authority was police misconduct)
- Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924) (abandonment includes both throwing away and dropping items in public)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (Fourth Amendment inquiry centers on legitimate expectation of privacy)