§ 17.09 Extending Terry: Temporary Seizures of Property

• Jurisdiction: North Carolina

§ 17.09 Extending Terry: Temporary Seizures of Property

In United States v. Place,¹²⁷ federal officers had advance information that P would disembark from an airplane with luggage containing narcotics. When P arrived, the officers seized his luggage and, 90 minutes later, subjected it to a "non-search"¹²⁸ sniff by a trained narcotics detection dog. The dog's response confirmed the officers' suspicions, after which they applied for and received a warrant to search the suitcase.

The Supreme Court, per Justice Sandra O'Connor, ruled that police officers may, without a warrant or probable cause, temporarily detain (seize) luggage on the basis of reasonable suspicion that it contains narcotics, in order to investigate the circumstances that aroused their suspicion. In short, Terry principles apply to seizures of property, and not simply to seizures of persons. However, the Court concluded that the 90-minute detention here was excessive, and therefore disapproved this seizure.

In reaching its conclusion, the Court applied the Terry reasonableness balancing test. It determined that the government's interest in seizing P's personal property — detecting drug trafficking — was substantial. On the countervailing side, Justice O'Connor observed that "intrusion on possessory interests . . . can vary both in its nature and extent." She distinguished between a seizure of property "after the owner has relinquished control of the property to a third party or, as here, from the immediate custody and control of the owner." In the latter situation, the seizure not only intrudes upon a person's possessory interest in his property, but also on his "liberty...