Police Officer Confronts Cyclist Over Construction Zone Dispute

[00:00:00]At approximately 2:30 in the morning on March 4th, 2026, David Plets was riding his bicycle through an active construction zone in Detroit, Michigan when Sergeant Brian Terranova of the Detroit Police Department observed him traveling in the center of the vehicular traffic lane rather than in the adjacent bike lane. Sergeant Terranova issued three separate orders directing Mr. Plets to move into the bike lane. Mr. Plets refused and explained to Sergeant Terranova that he believed that the bike lane was closed. Sergeant Terranova asked Mr. Plets to show him the sign closing the bike lane and the interaction that followed was captured on Sergeant Terranova's body camera.

[00:00:43]>> Now, >> Yeah, cuz you didn't look at it.

[00:00:45]>> [ __ ] you expect me to go through that?

[00:00:47]>> You see all that? Oh, wait a minute.

[00:00:49]You're telling me that you can't you can't slow your No, that's detour for street traffic.

[00:00:56]So, you want to argue with me?

[00:00:58]>> You didn't even put that sign >> Do you want me to take your information and do you want to argue with me? All I told you was to ride in the bike lane.

[00:01:07]Do I want a lawsuit? Let me see your ID.

[00:01:10]>> I don't have it on me.

[00:01:11]>> Oh, so you want to argue with the police when you don't have your ID and you're riding in the middle of the road.

[00:01:18]>> Is that the state?

[00:01:19]>> No, you're committing an infraction right now.

[00:01:21]>> I'm not. You're supposed to It said the law says ride as far as possible to the right.

[00:01:28]>> You see all of this all of this? What's your name, sir?

[00:01:31]>> I'm I don't I don't have to tell you.

[00:01:33]>> Yeah, you do cuz you're you're detained right now.

[00:01:36]>> Uh under what law did I break?

[00:01:38]>> Radio 470. I'm at Green and Fort.

[00:01:41]If you have another car rolling this way.

[00:01:44]What's your name?

[00:01:45]>> I don't think I have to do.

[00:01:47]>> Well, yeah, you do. I'm telling you Well, I don't care what you think. I'm telling you this bike lane all of this construction right here.

[00:01:56]>> What's your reasonable >> I'm not in any trouble. Just have a uncooperative individual.

[00:02:00]>> What's your >> All of this construction was made for people like you who want to ride your bike in the street. So, you don't get hit and get killed by cars. Now, you have all of this.

[00:02:10]>> killed by this.

[00:02:12]>> My man, if you can't slow your bike down enough to avoid this minor obstacle, >> How's Who's to say that I could even see that? If that was in the road, it would be >> Well, you have You have a headlight on your You have a headlight on your bike, >> don't you? Do Do you have a headlight on your bike?

[00:02:28]>> Yes, I have a headlight.

[00:02:28]>> Yeah, well, why don't Why isn't it on?

[00:02:30]>> It doesn't have to be. It's a bicycle.

[00:02:32]>> Well, you're the one who said that you can't avoid obstacles. And if you have a headlight, maybe you should have it on to not hit obstacles. Does that make sense to you?

[00:02:42]>> obstacles shouldn't be in the bike lane.

[00:02:46]>> It is your responsibility to control your vehicle. You see all these pylons?

[00:02:51]We control those. You have 2 seconds to Give me some ID or give me your name.

[00:02:57]>> I don't think I have What's your a reason >> I told you. Put your hands behind your back.

[00:03:03]I love people like you who think that you're going to tell me the law.

[00:03:07]>> When Sergeant Terachonok requests Mr. Plets' name or identification, Mr. Plets refuses. And Sergeant Terachonok responds by placing him in handcuffs.

[00:03:16]Section 257.311 of the Michigan Compiled Laws requires a licensee to carry and display their license on demand. However, this obligation applies only to individuals operating a motor vehicle. As Mr. Plets was riding a bicycle, he was not required to carry or provide a driver's license. Nonetheless, Mr. Plets still may have been required to identify himself if Sergeant Terachonok had least reasonable suspicion to detain him.

[00:03:42]Although Michigan is not passed a stand-alone so-called stop and identify statute, section 750.479 of the Michigan Compiled Laws prohibits knowingly obstructing a police officer in the discharge of his duties. The statute explicitly includes in the definition of obstruct a knowing failure to comply with a lawful command. As the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan explained in the 2020 case of Barrera v. City of Mount Pleasant, courts have interpreted that language to permit a finding of obstruction when a citizen refuses to identify himself during a lawful stop.

[00:04:15]Now, whether that theory applies here turns entirely on whether Sergeant Eric Knox's detention of Mr. Pletz was lawful. A question that hinges on whether Michigan law actually required Mr. Pletz to ride in the bike lane, which we will explore in our companion episode on Audit the Court.

[00:04:35]>> You got anything on you I need to know about?

[00:04:38]>> I have a work blade in my >> You have a what?

[00:04:40]>> A work blade in my front pocket.

[00:04:42]>> okay.

[00:04:44]>> Probably a small >> And just so you know, the warning that I gave you three times telling you not to drive in the middle of a traffic lane when there's a bike lane provided is my reasonable suspicion to talk to you.

[00:04:57]>> Even though it's closed.

[00:04:59]>> It's not closed. That is a detour sign for vehicle traffic.

[00:05:03]>> Why is there a sign in the road blocking >> It's a detour sign for vehicle traffic.

[00:05:09]>> And it's blocking the bike lane.

[00:05:11]>> That you can slow down and maneuver around.

[00:05:15]You're telling me that you can ride your bike, mind you, you were riding your bike with no hands the whole time I was behind you. So, if you're so good at riding your bike with no hands, then I have no problem believing that if you put your hands on the bike, that you could go around that minor little sign right there.

[00:05:35]>> It's not closed.

[00:05:36]>> Yeah, you should have done that when I gave you a nice warning and told you to get out of the street.

[00:05:43]But, no, you think that you're Mr. Law Johnny Awesome and you know everything.

[00:05:49]You walk >> over to this officer's car and give him all your information, or you're going to get another charge for resisting obstructing.

[00:05:59]Make sure he doesn't have any other weapons on him.

[00:06:06]Yeah, I'm good.

[00:06:11]Riding down the middle of the lane, no hands on the bike, just acting like he's some BMX star, right? I give him a nice warning. Hey, you got to be in the bike lane, dude.

[00:06:22]No, I don't. It's closed.

[00:06:24]Yeah, dude, uh you got to move out of the way. Bike lane. No, I don't have to do nothing. The bike lane's closed.

[00:06:31]Makes me come all the way back here because he says this sign is telling him that the bike lane is closed.

[00:06:38]And that he Look at he cannot maneuver around that sign right there cuz it's too dangerous.

[00:06:45]But yet he's in the middle of the lane with no hands riding down the street like he's on a 10-speed in in uh Palm Beach like some beach hippie swerving around. And then he wants to give me the uh oh, I don't have to provide you my information.

[00:07:01]Uh this is a non-stop and frisk state.

[00:07:04]You don't have any reasonable suspicion to stop me. Just being a clown.

[00:07:15]You got any other weapons besides this knife?

[00:07:18]>> Uh there was one in there.

[00:07:21]>> Man, you have a hard time listening, don't you?

[00:07:24]Do you have any other weapons besides that knife?

[00:07:30]>> Oh, you already grabbed it.

[00:07:32]Yeah, no, that's the only one I >> Man.

[00:07:37]Got me out here blocking trucks all because you don't want to listen.

[00:07:43]I'm going to tell you something, man.

[00:07:46]I don't know where you guys get this attitude that you don't have to listen to the police.

[00:07:55]It never works out for you guys.

[00:08:01]Does he got something else on him?

[00:08:16]I'm going to move my truck so this guy can go around. Once you get him in the seat, we'll pull off a little bit.

[00:08:24]Why you in this? Yeah, man. Appreciate it.

[00:08:28]470, we're secure. Thank you.

[00:09:15]>> And I'm going to speed it up. Um, the video is 23 um, and 23 minutes and 53 seconds. We're at 7 minutes and 23. Um, so I'll speed it up.

[00:09:33]>> No more weapons?

[00:09:34]>> I don't believe so.

[00:09:36]Check this out.

[00:09:40]Anything with his name in there yet?

[00:09:50]Did he give you his name yet?

[00:09:57]>> Mr. Plett agrees to provide his name, but states that he's doing so under duress and coercion. And Sergeant Terachanok responds that there is no duress or coercion because no one's hurting him. The Supreme Court has long recognized that when a citizen provides information to police under compulsion, the voluntariness of that statement is a constitutional question determined by the totality of the surrounding circumstances. As the court explained in the 1973 case of Schneckloth v.

[00:10:22]Bustamonte, the ultimate inquiry is whether the statement was the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice, or whether the citizen's will was overborne and their capacity for self-determination critically impaired, regardless of whether physical force was employed. The court also identified a list of factors that could be weighed by a court in determining whether a statement was coerced under the totality of the circumstances, which include both details of the interrogation and specific characteristics of the suspect, such as their age, education, or intelligence. Critically, the court made clear that no single factor is controlling, and that the analysis demands a careful scrutiny of all surrounding circumstances, rather than a mechanical inquiry into whether physical force was used. Accordingly, Sergeant Terachanok's assertion that the absence of physical harm foreclosed any possibility of coercion is not an accurate statement of the law.

[00:11:17]>> For ignoring a lawful order of a police officer, and for your information, my reasonable suspicion for stopping you is not reasonable suspicion, it's probable cause because I observed you violating an infraction in front of me. Do you understand? So, if you want to play jailhouse lawyer with me, you're about to get another charge of resisting and obstructing an officer and failing to give your name. Do you understand?

[00:11:35]>> I'm trying to give my name. I'm just saying it's under duress.

[00:11:37]>> Okay, you It can be under duress all you want. So, go ahead and give your name before you catch another charge.

[00:11:41]>> Sir, David >> David what?

[00:11:45]What's your name again?

[00:11:46]>> Pletz.

[00:11:54]>> Do you have a license?

[00:11:55]>> Have I ever?

[00:11:56]>> Yeah.

[00:11:59]Say your first name and last.

[00:12:00]>> David Pletz.

[00:12:02]>> David Pletz?

[00:12:04]>> Yeah, that's why he hangs out out here.

[00:12:07]Should call Allen Park and see if they want him.

[00:12:09]>> [snorts] >> Were these all issued to you when you were on a moped?

[00:12:12]>> Uh the tickets?

[00:12:13]>> Yeah.

[00:12:14]>> Yeah, they're all >> They're all for a few traffic tickets.

[00:12:17]>> Yeah, driving. I was driving.

[00:12:20]>> Your 411 has a 9300 from 2175 Detroit Avenue in Lincoln Park. And we are meeting that address at 48 Lincoln for coming to the station.

[00:12:31]>> [clears throat] >> What's his last name?

[00:12:38]>> Pletz.

[00:12:39]>> Mr. Pletz, that I have authority over you out here as a as a government official of the state of Michigan, the city of Detroit.

[00:12:46]>> Unless the law provides otherwise, which I don't think it >> I am a duly sworn officer.

[00:12:50]>> That's breaking the law.

[00:12:51]>> It's breaking the what?

[00:12:52]>> That That is breaking >> Where did you go to school? Your oath What oath did I break of yours?

[00:12:55]>> Your oath.

[00:12:56]>> No, it's actually breaking my oath if I allow you to break the law in front of me don't act.

[00:13:00]>> If you exercise color of law.

[00:13:02]>> I'm exercising my sworn duties to uphold the >> Terrion tells Mr. Pletz that he cannot simply do whatever he wants when he's stopped by the police. What a citizen's rights are during any police encounter largely depends on whether or not the officer has reasonable suspicion to detain or probable cause to arrest. As the Supreme Court explained in the 1983 case of Florida v. Royer, when an officer who lacks reasonable suspicion or probable cause approaches a citizen, they are not required to answer questions and may go about their way.

[00:13:31]However, where a lawful detention does exist, an individual is not free to physically leave and is required to identify themselves under Michigan law, as discussed earlier in this episode.

[00:13:42]Beyond those obligations, however, a detention does not suspend all of a citizen's remaining constitutional rights. For instance, the Supreme Court held in the 1987 case of Houston v. Hill that the First Amendment protects the right to verbally challenge and contest police conduct, and this protection does not evaporate simply because an individual is detained. A citizen who is stopped by police retains the right to remain silent, the right to refuse consent to a search, and the right to verbally dispute the basis for the stop, none of which amount to unlawful resistance in any legal sense.

[00:14:14]Accordingly, although a lawful detention carries real legal obligations, citizens like Mr. Platt still retain many constitutional rights during such a detention.

[00:14:24]>> Cuz it hasn't worked out for you in Allen Park either, where they gave you tickets for the same thing.

[00:14:28]>> It wasn't the same thing.

[00:14:29]>> Impeding traffic?

[00:14:29]>> I explained to him that I was driving.

[00:14:31]>> Oh, okay. Well, you like to impede traffic whether it's in a on a car or on a bike.

[00:14:36]>> No, actually I was impeding traffic for lawfully turning left on a yellow light cuz I was in the middle of >> Okay. Did you argue that one so vehemently with Allen Park?

[00:14:43]>> And the cop exercises his code of law authority over me.

[00:14:46]>> Oh, okay. So, you've been arrested a few times.

[00:14:48]>> didn't cuz I didn't have the means to get there.

[00:14:50]>> Oh. So, what do you just sit on the internet and look up all these legal terms cuz you think you're going to intimidate police officers with your legal jargon?

[00:14:55]>> No, so it's discriminatory to me.

[00:14:57]I have to make >> Sir, I'm sorry. You asked me something?

[00:15:00]I'll just um put in there that I gave him uh several uh warnings to use the bike lane. He refused.

[00:15:05]>> I did not refuse.

[00:15:06]>> Yeah, you did. You actually argued with me.

[00:15:08]>> why I have to use the bike lane when it's blocked off.

[00:15:10]>> It's not blocked, okay?

[00:15:11]>> 90% of the of the of the lane in the road was blocked. You would say that's not blocked?

[00:15:15]Is that not 90%?

[00:15:16]>> I'm sorry that you can't maneuver your little bicycle around that little thing right there. If you can't see that with this Look at this street light so brightly illuminating that little thing.

[00:15:25]>> Okay, well next time >> Maybe you need glasses or something.

[00:15:27]Maybe you shouldn't ride your bike without glasses.

[00:15:29]>> Next time on my way to work and home from work, I'm going to ride over there with my leg and then through the street light.

[00:15:33]>> Okay, so I got it all on video now that you're attempting to defraud the city by making a false lawsuit because of your own incompetence.

[00:15:39]>> it was fraud? Who said I wouldn't accidentally hit it?

[00:15:41]>> The fact that you just told me you're going to do it is not an accident. So I'll key mark that on here.

[00:15:45]>> I do something doesn't mean it won't happen as an accident.

[00:15:48]>> Yeah, okay. I hope that works out for you because now that's a felony fraud case. Yeah, go ahead and roll this guy's window up.

[00:15:54]Good luck with that, buddy. Just issued several warnings, refused, got got argumentative about the bike lane, refused to give me his identification.

[00:16:03]And that's when I called you guys over, so.

[00:16:12]I wonder if he just sits at home looking up stuff on the internet to But hey guys, this is a perfect example of someone who's going to throw a bunch of legal jargon at you to try and intimidate you. So when they do that, just make sure you know what you stopped them for and tell them.

[00:16:23]Cuz he wants to sit here and argue with me about everything under the sun. So when you got your probable cause, you're good to go and just stand by it.

[00:16:29]>> What's your badge number?

[00:16:31]>> 236148 It didn't come up when you put my last name.

[00:16:35]>> No, it showed the sergeant.

[00:16:37]>> Oh, does it come up by my badge?

[00:16:38]>> I tried that.

[00:16:40]Jeez.

[00:16:41]Sergeant somebody has your badge number.

[00:16:43]>> Oh, yeah in front of the badge? Yeah, that's how mine should come up.

[00:16:47]>> 236 What do you want my badge for?

[00:17:15]>> 148 >> I'm surprised it doesn't come up when you type me into the box.

[00:17:22]Try SK88 and see if that comes up.

[00:17:26]>> See See how it falls >> Yeah.

[00:17:30]That's why I'm a fan of the old tickets.

[00:17:32]It would have been done by now.

[00:17:34]It doesn't come up if you put my name in there at all?

[00:17:36]>> I tried it.

[00:17:37]>> No, I I believe you.

[00:17:40]What about if you put the pension number in that box?

[00:17:41]>> I tried that.

[00:17:43]>> No? Oh.

[00:17:48]>> Sergeant Terchanik issued Mr. Pletz a citation for disobeying a lawful order of a police officer and interfering with traffic. And on March 10th, 2026, he was officially charged. Mr. Pletz entered pleas of not guilty and the matter proceeded to a bench trial. Overall, Sergeant Terchanik gets an F for maintaining a condescending and berating demeanor throughout the encounter, demanding identification without a clear legal basis, and arresting Mr. Pletz for refusing to provide it, and misrepresenting the legal standards governing the detention. Rather than engaging with Mr. Pletz's legal objections in any meaningful way, Sergeant Terchanik repeatedly mocked them, characterized Mr. Pletz as a jailhouse lawyer, and delivered extended lectures about the futility of arguing with a nearly 30-year veteran. The legal framework governing identification in Michigan conditions any obligation to identify on the lawfulness of the underlying detention, and that lawfulness is far from certain given the statutory provisions governing where cyclists are and are not permitted to ride. Likewise, his claim that there could be no coercion in the absence of physical harm was inaccurate, as the Supreme Court's voluntariness framework expressly considers other types of compulsion and the individual characteristics of the suspect.

[00:19:02]Interestingly, Sergeant Terchanik later walked back this assertion under cross-examination at trial, describing this remark inaccurately.

[00:19:10]>> What?

[00:19:11]>> Oh, you know what? There's no duress and coercion because nobody's hurting you.

[00:19:14]You are You are lawfully detained.

[00:19:16]>> Duress usually implies force. It doesn't always have to imply force, though. And what Levi said, >> I got you. So, we're there. We're that Usually, it could.

[00:19:27]>> But the body camera footage here establishes a pattern of legally unsound commands that were delivered with unnecessary contempt towards a citizen who was attempting to engage with the law rather than circumvent it.

[00:19:40]Ultimately, this encounter amounted to a situation where an ego-driven officer berated and arrested a citizen for asserting his constitutional rights, all while being wrong about the law himself.

[00:19:51]Mr. Plets gets an A for demonstrating a meaningful understanding of his constitutional rights, maintaining his legal positions in the face of aggressive pushback from Sergeant Terchanik, and fighting the charges against him in court. Mr. Plets correctly identified that the bike lane order was not grounded in a statutory requirement. He refused to provide identification while articulating a legal basis for that refusal, and invoked his right to challenge the stop verbally without physically resisting.

[00:20:19]All of which reflect a citizen with a genuine and functional understanding of the rights available to him. His decision to provide his name while explicitly noting that he was doing so under compulsion was also legally significant as it preserved his objection without escalating the encounter in a way that could have supplied independent justification for additional charges. Rather than absorbing the encounter as a loss, Mr. Plets challenged the charges in court.

[00:20:44]Although Mr. Plets was at times combative in ways that did little to de-escalate a situation that was already volatile, he remained within his First Amendment rights throughout the encounter. I commend Mr. Plets for his composure under sustained pressure, his general understanding of the rights available to him during a police encounter, and his decision to seek accountability through the courts rather than through confrontation on the side of the road. Let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic that you would like us to discuss in the comments below. Thank you for watching.