What constitutes a "seizure" under the Fourth Amendment for Fourth Amendment purposes?

Not all encounters between police officers and citizens, however, are deemed seizures for Fourth Amendment purposes. "As the United States Supreme Court has explained: '"[N]ot all personal intercourse between policemen and citizens involves 'seizures' of persons."' [Citation.] In this context, a seizure occurs only 'when the officer, "'by means of physical force or show of authority,'" terminates or restrains [a person's] freedom of movement [citation] "through means intentionally applied ..." [citation].' [Citation.] The dispositive question is whether, '"in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he [or she] was not free to leave ..." [citation].' [Citation.] '[W]hen a person "has no desire to leave" for reasons unrelated to the police presence, the "coercive effect of the encounter" can be measured better by asking whether "a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the encounter ..." [citations].' [Citation.] The test is 'objective,' not subjective; it looks to 'the intent of the police as objectively manifested' to the person confronted. [Citation.] Accordingly, an 'officer's uncommunicated state of mind and the individual citizen's subjective belief are irrelevant ....'" (People v. Zamudio (2008) 43 Cal.4th 327, 341.)

If the encounter is not consensual, then it generally will fall within one of two categories of seizures. The first is a detention, which "involves a seizure of the individual for a limited duration and for limited purposes. A constitutionally acceptable detention can occur 'if there is an articulable suspicion that a person has committed or is about to commit a crime.'" (People v. Bailey (1985) 176 Cal.App.3d 402, 405.) The second type of seizure is an arrest, where the police must have probable cause to arrest a person for a crime. (Ibid.)

Page 8