Police cannot prolong stop’s duration beyond its initial purpose, without reasonable suspicion.
This is a positive ruling that recognizes 4th amendment protections against unlawful detentions, searches and seizures of drivers.
The US Supreme Court held that it would be unlawful if it resulted in the overall stop being “prolonged beyond” the time reasonably required to complete the mission of the stop, in absence of reasonable suspicion; and that detention drawn out after the resolution of the traffic matter for the K-9 drug check was in in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
This article contains the following features:
• Case Summary; ;
• Overview of US District Court ruling;
• Overview of Appeals Court ruling;
• Overview of U.S. Supreme Court
• Impacts of Ruling on Courts and Drivers in Arizona;
• Your 4th Amendment Rights at a Stop:
• Arizona Criminal Defense
In its decision the U.S. Supreme court did not repudiating the Government’s argument that if an officer could incrementally prolong a stop, and earn bonus time by completing the initial traffic matter expeditiously, in enable them to conduct a K-9 check within a reasonable amount of time, then the detention for the K-9 check is lawful.
• Do you think it should be lawful for police to proceed with a K-9 check or other criminal investigation without reasonable suspicion, even if the duration is not prolonged past a reasonable amount of time to complete the initial mission?
• Should more parameters be drawn for what is a “reasonable amount of time”? If so, how might that be accomplished?
•Do you think the ruling will compel police agencies to train officers to perform tasks in such a sequence that will allow for enough time to conduct a routine stop, without prolonging it for a K-9 check, in absence of reasonable suspicion of illegal drug activity? (from Justice Alito’s dissent)?
• Law enforcement agencies with more resources in background checks and technology might be able to complete a stop more expeditiously than a jurisdiction with lesser resources. How will that impact the rights of drivers in jurisdictions with more resources v. less technology in absence of reasonable suspicion to extend the stop?
- Law Office of Thomas M. HuguenorFounding Member, 1975 - present
4225 Executive Square, Suite 270 La Jolla, CA 92037
Since graduating from law school in 1972, Thomas M. Huguenor has dedicated his entire career to fighting for the rights of client’s dealing with Family Law cases. For more than four decades, he has built an outstanding reputation as one of San Diego’s leading divorce and child custody attorneys, earning certifications, awards and distinctions along the way.
Today, the Law Office of Thomas M. Huguenor focuses exclusively on providing aggressive, high-quality legal representation in Family Law courtrooms throughout San Diego County.
- California Western School of Law1968 - 1971