Connection lost
Server error
California v. Hodari D. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A fleeing suspect tossed drugs during a police chase. The Court held that a Fourth Amendment “seizure” does not occur from a mere show of authority, like a chase, until the suspect either physically submits to the authority or is physically restrained.
Legal Significance: This case critically narrowed the definition of a Fourth Amendment seizure. It established that for a seizure by “show of authority” to occur, the subject must actually submit to that authority; a reasonable belief of non-freedom to leave is insufficient on its own.
California v. Hodari D. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Police officers patrolling a high-crime area in an unmarked car observed a group of youths, including respondent Hodari D., who fled upon seeing the officers. Officer Pertoso left the car and pursued Hodari on foot. Just before Pertoso was upon him, Hodari tossed away a small object, which was later determined to be crack cocaine. A moment later, the officer tackled and handcuffed Hodari. In the subsequent juvenile proceeding, Hodari moved to suppress the drug evidence, arguing that he was seized without reasonable suspicion the moment the officer began the pursuit, and the drugs were therefore fruit of an illegal seizure. The State of California conceded that the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to stop Hodari at the outset of the chase. The sole legal question was whether a seizure had occurred at the time Hodari discarded the cocaine.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment occur when a police officer makes a show of authority, such as a pursuit, but the subject does not yield and continues to flee?
The Court held that Hodari D. was not seized within the meaning Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a “seizure” under the Fourth Amendment occur when a police officer makes a show of authority, such as a pursuit, but the subject does not yield and continues to flee?
Conclusion
This decision established a bright-line rule that a show of authority without Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco lab
Legal Rule
A seizure of a person under the Fourth Amendment requires either the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aut
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Scalia, grounded its analysis Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepte
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A Fourth Amendment “seizure” requires either the application of physical force