if the contact between a law enforcement officer and a citizen is merely a consensual encounter rather than a seizure. Popple v. State, 626 So.2d 185, 186 (Fla.1993). The test for determining if someone has been seized is whether “in view of all of the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave.” United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554, 100 S.Ct. 1870, 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980). See also Popple, 626 So.2d at 188. Deputy Cronin’s encounter with Galicia bore none of the indicia of a seizure. Unlike the officer in Morrow, Deputy Cronin remained on the driver’s side of the vehicle while requesting Galicia’s identification, and he made no attempt to restrict Gali-cia’s ability to leave. See Morrow, 848 So.2d 1290 (<HOLDING>). While Galicia may have believed he had to
holding that the encounter between an officer and the defendant did not rise to the level of a terry stop until the defendant gave the officer his license and the officer informed the defendant that he was going to be given a patdown holding warrants check on passenger before officer inquired as to registered owner of suspected stolen car was unreasonable because officer had not formed reasonable articulable suspicion that defendant was engaged in any criminal activity holding that by the time the officer asked the defendant if he could frisk him the encounter had evolved into a stop holding that officers encounter with defendant a frontseat passenger in a car stopped for speeding evolved into investigatory stop without reasonable suspicion of criminal activity when defendant refused to give officer his name and officer walked around to passengers door positioned himself there and called for backup when he did not know whether defendant had been wearing his seat belt while the car was in motion any reasonable person would believe they were not free to leave when officer positioned himself outside their car door and called for backup holding that there was probable cause for arrest where officers knew defendants had recently been with suspected drug dealer officers saw defendants car being maneuvered so as to indicate that surveillance had been detected and when officers approached car defendant attempted to place package under car and then pulled the package back inside the car and closed and locked the car door