top of page

Courts have addressed the legalities and procedures surrounding police detainment, a tool officers use to maintain public safety while investigating possible criminal activity. Understanding the various conditions under which law enforcement can detain individuals, the rights of those detained, and the responsibilities of the detaining officers is critical. There can be a fine line between lawful detainment and unlawful restraint.



United States v. Arvizu (2002):

The Supreme Court emphasized that in determining reasonable suspicion for a stop, officers can consider the totality of the circumstances rather than relying on individual factors.


Illinois v. Wardlow (2000):

The Supreme Court held that unprovoked flight upon seeing the police, in an area known for high narcotics activity, creates reasonable suspicion justifying a Terry stop.


Florida v. Bostick (1991):

The Supreme Court held that police can approach and question individuals on buses without a warrant or probable cause, as long as the encounter is consensual.


United States v. Hensley (1985):

The Supreme Court ruled that a Terry stop could be justified based on a wanted flyer, as long as there is reasonable suspicion to make the stop.


Berkemer v. McCarty (1984):

The Supreme Court held that the roadside questioning of a motorist detained pursuant to a traffic stop does not amount to a custodial interrogation and, therefore, Miranda warnings are not required.


United States v. Mendenhall (1980):

The Supreme Court held that an individual is seized only if, in view of all the circumstances, a reasonable person would have believed they were not free to leave.


Brown v. Texas (1979):

The Supreme Court held that the mere act of walking away from police, without more, does not create reasonable suspicion to justify a stop and detention.


United States v. Watson (1976):

The Supreme Court held that a suspect can be stopped and briefly detained in a public place based on probable cause without a warrant.


United States v. Martinez-Fuerte (1976):

The Supreme Court addressed immigration checkpoints and held that routine stops at checkpoints for brief questioning did not violate the Fourth Amendment.


Terry v. Ohio (1968):

The Supreme Court established the "stop and frisk" doctrine, allowing police to briefly detain and pat down individuals if they have a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot and that the person may be armed and dangerous.


Q: What is considered lawful detainment for a First Amendment auditor?

A: Lawful detainment occurs when an auditor is temporarily held by police due to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.


Q: How long can a First Amendment auditor be detained?

A: An auditor can be detained only long enough for the police to confirm or dispel their suspicion, usually a brief period.


Q: Does being detained mean I'm under arrest?

A: No, detainment is a temporary hold for investigation, not an arrest. An arrest requires probable cause.


Q: What rights do I have while being detained?

A: You have the right to remain silent, the right to request an attorney, the right to refuse consent to a search, and the right to record the encounter unless prohibited by law.


Q: Can I ask why I'm being detained?

A: Yes, you can and should ask the officer for the reason for your detainment.


Q: Do I have to provide ID when detained?

A: This depends on the state's law. Some states require you to provide your name if asked during a lawful stop.


Q: Can I walk away if I'm not under arrest?

A: You can ask if you're free to go; if the officer says no, you are being detained. If yes, you may leave.


Q: What constitutes reasonable suspicion for detainment of an auditor?

A: Reasonable suspicion would include specific, articulable facts suggesting the auditor is involved in or about to be involved in criminal activity.


Q: Can my belongings be searched while I'm detained?

A: An officer may pat down your outer clothing for weapons if they believe you may be armed; otherwise, a search generally requires your consent or probable cause.


Q: Can police delete my footage if I'm detained?

A: No, police do not have the right to delete your footage without a warrant or your consent.


Q: What should I do if I believe my detainment is unlawful?

A: Stay calm, comply with police orders, and express your belief that the detainment is unlawful; afterward, consult an attorney.


Q: Can I be detained for refusing to stop recording?

A: You cannot be lawfully detained simply for recording in public, but additional circumstances or actions could contribute to reasonable suspicion.


Q: Are there any detainment actions that violate my First Amendment rights?

A: Detainment that is based solely on your lawful First Amendment activities, like recording in public, would be a violation.


Q: If detained, can I later access the police report of the incident?

A: Yes, you typically have the right to request a copy of the police report through a public records request or similar process.


Q: What recourse do I have if my rights are violated during a detainment?

A: You can file a complaint with the police department, seek redress through civil litigation, or contact civil liberties organizations.


Disclaimer: The information provided in these FAQs is for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. For legal advice regarding your specific situation, please consult a licensed attorney.

bottom of page