The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the order that granted the defendant’s suppression motion. The Commonwealth contended the lower court erred in categorizing the police officers’ interaction with the defendant as an improper investigative detention rather than a lawful mere encounter. Central to this appeal was the question of “whether a reasonable person would feel free to leave or not engage with a police officer when, inter alia, this was a two-phase interaction, there were multiple armed and uniformed officers present, and one officer requested the defendant’s identification while also questioning him about his parole status and whether he had anything on his person.”
