Hatcherson-Ross v. United States

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed Hatcherson-Ross's firearm and ammunition convictions, holding that he was not seized under the Fourth Amendment until officers grabbed his arms and directed him to come out from under a stranger's porch. His compliance with an early request to remove a hand from his pocket was not submission to a show of authority, and he never submitted to the later commands to get on the ground or hold on because he fled. The court also held that the search of the stranger's backyard and storage bin did not implicate his Fourth Amendment rights because he had no expectation of privacy in another's property, rendering the heavily litigated abandonment question immaterial.