Washington
How California v. Hodari D. applies in Washington: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Procedure.
Washington courts generally follow the principle that seizure occurs when a reasonable person would believe they are not free to leave. This reflects a common understanding of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable seizures.
In Washington, a seizure occurs only when an officer's show of authority, combined with the subject's submission to that authority, constitutes a restraint on the individual's freedom.
The court clarified that a mere encounter does not constitute a seizure; a seizure requires either physical restraint or submission to authority.
A person is not seized under the Fourth Amendment unless they are physically restrained or comply with police orders indicating they cannot leave.
The court found no seizure when the defendant fled from police, as flight in response to police presence does not equate to submission.
While Washington adheres to the principles established in *California v. Hodari D.*, it may also emphasize state constitutional protections that require a more rigorous analysis of what constitutes a seizure. Washington courts have demonstrated a nuanced understanding of individual rights during police encounters.
Students should be familiar with the distinctions between seizure definitions under Washington law and relevant federal precedents as these concepts are often tested in the bar exam.