State of Connecticut v. Michael Edmonds.

Summary

The court held that the defendant was seized no later than when an armed, uniformed officer commanded him to stop, and that the seizure was unsupported by reasonable and articulable suspicion. The surrounding circumstances, including two marked cruisers approaching from opposite directions in a dark private parking lot and blocking or thwarting the defendant's departure, would have caused a reasonable person to believe he was not free to leave. The court also held that the defendant's claim was preserved and that the record was adequate for review, reversed the Appellate Court, and directed suppression of the narcotics evidence. Rogers, C.J., and Robinson, J., concurred on narrower or supplemental grounds, while Espinosa, J., dissenting, would have found the record inadequate and affirmed.