## Facts

- Around 1:30 a.m., two Boston police officers in a marked cruiser saw Jamal Ford walking on a sidewalk and decided to speak with him.
- The cruiser drove the wrong way down a one-way street toward Ford, without activating lights or siren, and an officer asked if he could speak with Ford.
- Ford voluntarily approached the cruiser, produced identification, and answered questions, including that he had no warrants and was not on probation.
- Both officers exited the cruiser and approached Ford from the same direction; they did not draw weapons, issue commands, or tell him he could not leave.
- Ford raised his hands; when asked if he had any weapons, he stated he had a gun in his pocket and said it could not fire.
- The officers then handcuffed Ford, frisked him, and recovered a handgun from his pocket.
- The interaction before handcuffing lasted about two to three minutes.

## Issues

1. Whether Ford was seized for Fourth Amendment purposes before admitting he had a gun, such that the firearm should be suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful seizure unsupported by reasonable suspicion.

## Decision

- The First Circuit affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress and upheld the conviction entered on Ford’s conditional guilty plea.
- The court held no seizure occurred during the initial questioning or when the officers exited the cruiser and approached Ford.
- The seizure occurred only after Ford admitted possessing a gun, when officers handcuffed and frisked him.
- Because Ford’s admission supplied a specific, articulable basis to believe he was armed, the detention and frisk were justified, and the gun was admissible.

## Legal Principles

- A person is seized under the Fourth Amendment only if, considering all circumstances, a reasonable person would not feel free to leave or disregard the police.
- Police may approach an individual in public and ask questions without effectuating a seizure, so long as they do not convey that compliance is required through force, commands, or comparable shows of authority.
- Officer conduct such as stopping nearby, exiting a vehicle, and speaking at close range does not alone create a seizure absent objective indicia of restraint (e.g., blocking movement, weapon display, or authoritative commands).
- A voluntary admission made during a consensual encounter may provide reasonable suspicion (or more) supporting a subsequent seizure and protective frisk for weapons.

## Conclusion

The court treated the pre-admission interaction as consensual and held that Ford was not seized until officers handcuffed and frisked him after he disclosed he had a gun, making suppression unwarranted because the later detention and search were justified by his own statement.


United States v. Ford, 548 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008)