Two on Rodriguez and extended stops

The stop of defendant’s vehicle was extended for a dog sniff. The defense argued that it was unreasonable, and the trial court found it was de minimus. Rodriguez was then decided, and it applies. The dog sniff occurred after defendant should have been released. Watts v. State, 2015 Ga. App. LEXIS 727 (Nov. 20, 2015).

Even though the Supreme Court has counseled against using “standing” instead of “reasonable expectation of privacy” or “interest,” “the two formulas come to the same thing, and cases continue to discuss Fourth Amendment ‘standing.’” Defendant was in a rental car that he didn’t rent and wasn’t an authorized driver, yet he conceivably still could have had standing. No matter, however, because reasonable suspicion developed to continue the stop for a drug dog to arrive at the scene, and it wasn’t unreasonable under Rodriguez. United States v. Sanford, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 20503 (7th Cir. Nov. 25, 2015).