Tyndal

United States v. Tyndal

Good Law
172 F. App'x 741
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 2006No. 05-30029California339 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

1. The district court properly denied Appellant James Tyndal’s motion to suppress evidence. The initial encounter between Officer Silva and Tyndal was consensual. See Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 434 , 111 S.Ct. 2382 , 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991) (“[M]ere police questioning dos not constitute a seizure.”).

2. “The detention of a suspect under Terry [v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968) ] is evaluated against a standard of reasonableness under the totality of the circumstances.” United States v. Christian, 356 F.3d 1103, 1105 (9th Cir.2004) (citations omitted). Officer Silva was justified in asking Tyndal for his driver’s license in light of the fact that Tyndal had admitted driving out of the parking lot. An initially consensual encounter may ripen into a seizure requiring reasonable suspicion. See INS v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210, 215 , 104 S.Ct. 1758 , 80 L.Ed.2d 247 (1984). Similarly, a detention based on reasonable suspicion may ripen into a full-blown arrest sustained by probable cause. See United States v. Thompson, 282 F.3d 673, 679 (9th Cir.2002).

3. When the officers learned that Tyndal’s driving privileges had been suspended, they had,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.