WPI 342.10 Unlawful Seizure of Person—Fourth Amendment—Exception to Warrant Requirement—Reasona...
6A WAPRAC WPI 342.10Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
6A Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 342.10 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Part XVII. Civil Rights
Chapter 342. Civil Rights—Fourth Amendment—Unreasonable Search and Seizure
WPI 342.10 Unlawful Seizure of Person—Fourth Amendment—Exception to Warrant Requirement—Reasonable Suspicion for Investigatory Stop
When a police [or other peace] officer briefly stops a person without a warrant in order to investigate criminal activity, this brief stop is lawful if the officer has a reasonable suspicion the person stopped [is] [has been] engaged in criminal activity.
“Reasonable suspicion” is present when the officer has an objective belief, based on specific and articulable facts, that would justify stopping [the plaintiff] in order to investigate possible criminal activity.
[If the plaintiff was present [in a place] [at a time of day] where criminal activity often happens, this circumstance without more does not create “reasonable suspicion.”]
[If the plaintiff refused to answer questions or refused to cooperate with the investigation, and peacefully went about [his] [her] business, this behavior without more does not constitute “reasonable suspicion.”]
[If the plaintiff responded to the police officer's presence by fleeing, this behavior without more does not constitute reasonable suspicion.]
NOTE ON USE
Use this instruction for a claim of an unlawful seizure under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments when a Terry stop is involved.
Use this instruction as applicable with WPI 342.08 (Unlawful Arrest/Seizure of Person—Fourth Amendment—Exceptions to Warrant Requirement—Probable Cause to Believe Crime Committed), WPI 342.09 (Unlawful Arrest/Seizure of Person—Fourth Amendment—Exceptions to Warrant Requirement—Probable Cause—Considerations), WPI 340.01 (Claims Instruction for Section 1983 Cases), WPI 340.02 (Civil Rights—Individual Defendant—Burden of Proof on the Issues), WPI 340.03 (Civil Rights—“Under Color of Law”—Definition), WPI 340.04 (Civil Rights—“Subjects” and “Causes to be Subjected”—Definition), and WPI 342.02 (Definition of “Seizure” of a Person—Fourth Amendment.) Use the bracketed language as applicable.
COMMENT
The instruction has been revised for this edition to reflect that flight without more does not constitute reasonable suspicion. State v. Gatewood, 163 Wn.2d 534, 182 P.3d 426 (2008); State v. Howerton, 187 Wn.App. 357, 348 P.3d 781 (2015).
The instruction and this Comment are modified from a pattern instruction used by the Ninth Circuit. See 9th Cir. Civ. Jury Instr. 9.21 (2007). This instruction is supported by state and federal precedent. Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 123–25, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000); Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 437, 111 S.Ct. 2382, 115 L.Ed.2d 389 (1991); United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 7, 109 S.Ct. 1581, 104 L.Ed.2d 1 (1989); Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983); Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 17, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); State v. Doughty, 170 Wn.2d 57, 239 P.3d 573 (2010); State v. Day, 161 Wn.2d 889, 168 P.3d 1265 (2007); State v. Duncan, 146 Wn.2d 166, 43 P.3d 513 (2002); McKinney v. City of Tukwila, 103 Wn.App. 391, 403–04, 13 P.3d 631 (2000).
With regard to avoiding comments on the evidence, see the Comment to WPI 340.01 (Claims Instruction for Section 1983 Cases).
[Current as of September 2018.]
Westlaw. © 2022 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |