Differentiate between a consensual encounter and a seizure requiring justification.

• A. A consensual encounter requires no suspicion; a seizure restricts freedom of movement and requires reasonable suspicion or probable cause depending on duration and actions.
• B. A consensual encounter requires a warrant.
• C. A seizure is always outside the law.
• D. A consensual encounter requires probable cause.

Answer: (C)

The key idea is the distinction between voluntary contact and a detainment. A consensual encounter is a voluntary interaction in which the person is not detained and is free to leave at any time; no suspicion or legal justification is required for this kind of contact. The officer may ask questions or request cooperation, but there’s no restraint of liberty.

A seizure, on the other hand, occurs when the officer’s authority is exercised in a way that a reasonable person would not feel free to ignore or leave. This can be shown by actions like blocking the person, commanding them to stop, or otherwise restraining movement. Once a seizure has occurred, the situation must be justified: for a brief stop, the officer must have reasonable suspicion; for longer detentions or for arrest, probable cause is required.

So, the correct distinction is that a consensual encounter requires no suspicion, while a seizure restricts movement and requires justification based on the level of restraint and the applicable standard (reasonable suspicion or probable cause). The other statements are incorrect because consensual encounters do not require a warrant and a seizure is not “always” outside the law, since seizures can be lawful with proper justification.