 It accepted the government's argument that the Court's 1981 holding in "Michigan v. Summers" that persons in the immediate vicinity of a search can be detained while the search was being executed was broad enough to cover the pursuit and detention of a defendant who had left the scene in a vehicle.Kennedy's opinion held that it did not, since once Bailey had driven away none of the law-enforcement interests the earlier holding identified were involved.Scalia said that the only thing that mattered was that the vehicle was no longer in the immediate vicinity, and that balancing tests created confusion.