United States v. Joseph Mabery

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that shining a spotlight on a vehicle was “no more intrusive . . . than knocking on the vehicle’s window”
• noting that “[c]ircumstances indicative of a seizure would include the threatening presence of several officers . . . indicating that compliance with the officer’s request might be compelled”
• finding no seizure when an officer shined a spotlight on a civilian's vehicle
• “[T]he act of shining a spotlight on [the] vehicle from the street was certainly no more intrusive (and arguably less so) than knocking on the vehicle’s window.”
• “Nor would blocking the parking lot driveway establish a seizure of Mabery’s person—he could have been free to leave, even if his vehicle had to remain parked.”
• “[T]he act of shining a spotlight on [the] vehicle from the street was certainly no more intrusive (and arguably less so) than knocking on the vehicle’s window.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).