United States v. Jorge Nicolas Acosta

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the appellant’s rights invocation was ambiguous after considering that the appellant stated that he was willing to speak to the police while also stating that he would not waive his rights
• holding that the appellant’s rights invocation was ambiguous after considering that the appellant stated that he was willing to speak to the police while also stating that he would not waive his rights
• concluding that officers reasonably suspected defendant might have a weapon because they believed he was transporting high-value property in his car, and that keeping him away from the car was reasonable because it had not been searched for weapons
• applying Davis when the appellant told the police that he would make a statement but refused to sign a rights waiver form
• explaining that when evaluating the overall reasonableness of the scope of a Terry stop, we apply “four non- exclusive factors”: (1) “the law enforcement purposes served by the detention”; (2) “the diligence with which the police pursue the investigation”; (3
• summarizing our cases about how much “restriction on freedom of movement” a Terry stop may involve

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).