Printer-friendly version
East County News Service
Photo by Michael Pereckas
April 22, 2015 (Washington D.C.) – A divided Supreme Court has ruled that police cannot detain a motorist pulled over for a traffic stop any longer than required to issue a ticket or warning for the driving infraction. An officer cannot delay a motorist to allow for inspection of the vehicle, such as by a drug-sniffing dog when the cause for the stop was a traffic violation.
Writing for the majority, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated, “We hold that a police stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.” That protection is provided in the Fourth Amendment.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy dissented. Alito called the ruling “unnecessary, impractical and arbitrary.”
The case, Rodriguez v. United States, involved a Nebraska motorist observed by an officer to have swerved. The driver told the policeman he was trying to avoid a pothole. After questioning the driver and passenger, and verifying the driver’s license, registration and insurance, the officer wrote a citation.
He also called for backup and asked the driver for permission to have a drug-sniffing dog inspect the vehicle. The driver refused, but the officer, aided by a backup unit, conducted the dog search anyway. The dog found a stash of methamphetamine drugs and the driver was indicted for possession with intent to sell.
His lawyer sought to suppress evidence based on the 22 minutes the stop took. A trial court sided with police, but an appellate court overturned that ruling, finding the wait for the dog search unreasonable absent reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
Recent comments