R.J.C. v. State

I respectfully dissent. The majority reasons that a seizure occurred based on the fact that the deputy repeatedly requested appellant to remove his hands from his pockets. I disagree with that reasoning and conclude that a seizure does not automatically occur when an officer requests a person to remove his hands from his pockets.

According to the majority’s reasoning, “[o]ur court has consistently held that orders, or even requests, to remove one’s hand from a pocket will elevate a consensual encounter to the level of an investigatory detention.” See, e.g., Delorenzo v. State, 921 So.2d 873,…