In California v. Hodari D. (1991), what was the key issue concerning police pursuit?

The key issue in California v. Hodari D. (1991) revolves around the legal definitions of what constitutes an arrest and the associated implications for police pursuits. In this case, the Supreme Court addressed the circumstances under which a suspect is effectively "seized" by law enforcement. The Court determined that a police pursuit, without physical restraint or a show of authority that would have led a reasonable person to believe they were not free to leave, does not equate to an arrest. Thus, a suspect who flees from officers can be pursued without the officers first establishing probable cause for an arrest.

This ruling clarified the legal definition of arrest, establishing that a mere chase does not constitute an arrest if the suspect is not physically seized or restrained in a way that would imply they were under arrest. The decision emphasizes the distinction between active pursuit and an actual arrest, which is crucial in understanding officers' conduct and the rights of individuals in such scenarios.