Amendment during a traffic stop, see Brendlin, 551 U.S. at 263, 127 S.Ct. 2400 (concluding that occupants of car that was pulled over are seized within meaning of Fourth Amendment), that seizure is not illegal if the stop was lawful. Thus, because the stop of the Chevrolet was lawful, Officer Verica had the authority to order Richardson to remain in the car while the stop was taking place. Yet Officer Verica’s lawful attempt to briefly seize Richardson was unsuccessful. Richardson only momentarily complied with Verica’s order to remain in the car, and momentary compliance does not amount to submission to a seizure. See Waterman, 569 F.3d at 146 (concluding that submission to police order requires “something more than a momentary pause or mere inaction”); Valentine, 232 F.3d at 359 (<HOLDING>). Importantly, at the time of Richardson’s
holding that there was no seizure when defendant failed to place his hands on car as instructed even assuming that he momentarily complied by stopping and giving his name holding that there was no arrest when suspect was moved from his own truck to a police car holding that a son could be bound by a contract that he signed even though his fathers name and not his appeared in the body holding mr contrisciane was occupying his insured vehicle when he was struck and killed by an uninsured vehicle after leaving his car to walk over to patrol car with his drivers information as directed by police officer holding that defendant was not resident of his mothers household even though his drivers license listed his mothers address and he received mail there because he expressed a belief that his residence was in a different location than his mothers home he rented and occupied his own residence and he testified that he was only living with his mother after expiration of his lease until he could find another place to live