Institute for Criminal Justice Education, Inc. (ICJE) | home
DUI in Alabama | Values: The Impact on Orgazitional Effectiveness | Groupthink | Office Romance | Search Warrant Alert | Consent to Search Forms | Plain Feel, A Second Look | Handcuffing During Temporary Detention | A college degree - is it worth the effort? | Mug Shots, Mug Books and Photo Spreads | Plain Feel and Tic Tac Boxes | Cybercrime and Terrorism | Officers' Statements to Suspects | Civil Remedies for Crime Victims | Officer Turnover | Newsletter Archives | Police Pursuits: Book Review | Police Pursuits: Reforming the Law | Managing Office Politics | K9 Effectiveness | Preventing Workplace Crime | Perception and Change in Law Enforcement | Entrapment Problems in Handling Informants | Terrorism: Target Selection and Symbolism
Summary
Although the use of handcuffs on a suspect is generally considered an arrest, there are many times when this procedure is necessary for the safety of the officer or the suspect. In these cases, handcuffing should not be considered an arrest, but the officer is cautioned to document why the handcuffs were used and should explain the situation to the suspect.
ICJE articles have been prepared for educational and information purposes only. They are not intended to be published as legal advice or legal opinion about any specific subject matter. Transmission of this ICJE information is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship between the author(s), ICJE and the reader. The opinions expressed in the articles found herein are those of the author(s), and not necessarily those of ICJE. Officers and departments should review any proposed change in policy or procedure with the appropriate professional authority or advisor prior to implementation. All articles may be reproduced and distributed free of charge with attribution.
Handcuffing During Temporary Detention
Does the use of handcuffs turn a temporary detention situation into an arrest?
by Robert T. Thetford, JD
Handcuffing a suspect after a temporary detention (Terry Stop) is generally considered an arrest unless exceptional circumstances exist. Bradley v. State, 494 So.2d 750 (Ala. Cr. App., 1985), affirmed 494 So. 2d 772 (Ala. 1986). The test for arrest is whether or not a reasonable person, in the suspect's position, would have understood that he was under arrest Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 442, 104 S. Ct. 3138, 3151 (1984).
This is particularly so when the officer testifies that the suspect was not under arrest but that he was handcuffed, with no reason given for the handcuffing. Lamar v. State, 578 So. 2d 1382 (Ala. Cr. App., 1991). This will be ruled an arrest every time.
This does not mean, however, that an arrest takes place every time an officer handcuffs a suspect he has placed under temporary detention. Examples where courts have held no arrest are as follows:
1. The suspect voluntarily accompanied the officer to the police station and was placed in handcuffs because of departmental policy, Darden v. State, 571 So. 2d 1272 (Ala. Cr. App., 1990). This was a close call and the court made it clear that departmental policy should not be used as an excuse - there generally must be more.
2. Handcuffing after the suspect had disobeyed an order to raise his hands and had made furtive gestures, U.S. v. Taylor, 716 F. 2d 701 (9th Cir., 1983).
3. Handcuffing of two men suspected of armed bank robbery where a third man was suspected to be in the vicinity and the suspects appeared extremely nervous, U.S. v. Bautista, 684 F. 2d 1286 (9th Cir., 1982).
4. Handcuffing in light of the suspect's flight and the violent nature of the suspected crime: rape, State v. Friederick, 663 P. 2d 122 (1983).
5. Handcuffing where the officer was informed that the suspect had threatened to kill someone and the officer verified the suspect's violent behavior, U.S. v. Merkley, 988 F. 2d 1062 (10th Cir., 1993).
6. Handcuffing of an armed robbery suspect where the officer feared that an accomplice might be hiding in the suspect's car, U.S. v. Saffeels, 982 F. 2d 1199 (8th Cir., 1992).
7. Handcuffing where the officer could reasonably anticipate he might have to go to the aid of his fellow officers, U.S. v. Crittendon, 883 F. 2d 326 (4th Cir., 1989).
Even if handcuffs are properly used on a suspect during a temporary detention, they should be removed as soon as it is safe to do so. A recent Florida case held that the continued use of handcuffs after the suspect had received a pat-down and no weapons were found was illegal. The court stressed that the suspect had offered no resistance, did not make any threats and was not particularly belligerent, Reynolds v. State, 592 So. 2d 1082 (Fla., 1992).
TRAINING TIP : If handcuffs are used in a temporary detention situation, the officer must have a good reason for doing so and should make a notation of the reason. The officer should advise the suspect of the reasons for the handcuffing and the fact that the suspect is not under arrest. Further, the officer should tell the suspect that the handcuffs will be taken off as soon as it is safe or possible to do so.