I’ve Googled everywhere but could not really find a clear answer. My question is: if someone calls the police on me, am I supposed to wait for said police?
I know that, in the event of an accident, the involved parties should wait for the police if the matter is not resolved (or else they could be charged with leaving the scene of an accident). But what about other cases?
Suppose I am browsing a store, and the shopkeeper accuses me of shoplifting and calls the cops directly. Can I legally leave, or do I also have to wait for the police?
I’ve seen arguments on both sides. For one thing, quickly leaving is often a good way to avoid an altercation. After all, I have not been arrested. If the police want to find me, I’m sure they could do it easily. On the other hand, I might also want to tell the police my side of the story, in order to clear my name. Not to mention, an overzealous officer might interpret leaving the scene as “resisting arrest.”
So do I need to wait for police in a non-accident situation? Should I wait for them?
Your state shoplifting statute outlines the “specific elements”. It will probably say that if probable cause or such exists to believe merchandise was taken, an owner/agent can detain you in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable time.
If a person is detained, it is not a technical citizens arrest, if permitted at all in your state, it is a restraint of liberty. Now to be sure, you need to review the case law of the shoplifting statute.
I do remember a section of our law where an agent of a business, namely a housing property, catches a person trespassing, they can arrest them themselves, not simply a restraint of liberty.
Years ago, I was researching this for my state, Ohio, there was one case, probably old law now, where the court ruled a person who took of after he was detained for shoplifting was guilty of ESCAPE, just as if he fled from the police when detained.
I do not know if the charge stuck or if an appeal was taken?
So, to answer the question, while it is probably legal to walk away, as the merchant can not use excess restraint against you if you resist, once detained, it is “possible” (??) some charge could be made, unlikely though.
It depends. If the merchant is legally entitled to detain you or perform a citizens arrest, you may not legally leave. The laws for when a citizen is allowed to detain you vary subtly from state to state, but in general it is illegal to detain someone or prevent them from leaving if no crime has indeed occurred.
I’m not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. I’m just some guy who has some experience with citizens arrests.
Businesses generally enjoy “storekeeper’s privilege”, which is the right to detain people on the premises on reasonable articulable grounds. The purpose is to allow them to investigate, not to hold you for arrest, though.
In this case, if you wait till the police arrive, they search you, and don’t find any shoplifted goods on you, then you are basically cleared (and due an apology from the shopkeeper).
But once you leave, that defense is no longer available to you. So it’s a bad idea if you are innocent.
Would there also be the possibility of a charge of obstructing the police? If they’re coming to a location to interview you as part of an investigation and you leave the location, you’re obviously preventing them from conducting that interview.
Remember this guy? What about him? I know I would have flipped the bitch off, got in my car, and left. Of course, we don’t know what state he’s in, so HMMV.
I wonder about this too. Isn’t a citizens arrest technically different from the shopkeepers’ privilege?
Is there any case law indicating that a citizens’ arrest or a stop/detention pursuant to the shopkeepers’ privilege places a positive duty on the person stopped to remain and wait for law enforcement, or is it only a justification for the private citizen’s otherwise illegal act of detaining the person? To make an analogy, in many areas a person is allowed to use violence in self-defense, but I understand self-defense to be an excuse for otherwise illegal behavior. To my knowledge, it doesn’t create a legal duty incumbent upon the person I am using self defense against to submit and allow themselves to be injured or killed by my act of self defense and, if they do not, allow a prosecution for “Resisting Self Defense”.