ID: Video of stop belied officer’s claim of nervousness; refusal of consent not a factor in RS

“The factors known to the officer were Neal’s nervousness, attire, and the time of day, and after substantial questioning, Neal’s refusal to consent to a search of his automobile. As noted above, none of these factors alone bears more than little significance in a reasonable suspicion analysis. Taken together, they still do not support a reasonable suspicion, even considering the officer’s experience, that Neal was engaged in criminal activity. The sequence of events resembles an experienced officer’s ‘hunch’ that something was out of the ordinary, but a hunch is not sufficient to meet the stringent requirements of the Fourth Amendment. [Sokolow] at 7. Absent other articulable facts that Neal was engaged in criminal activity, the officer’s detainment was unjustified. As such, we hold that the totality of the circumstances were inadequate to create reasonable suspicion for a drug investigation.” “Moreover, the district court observed that the videotape of the encounter did not support the officer’s testimony regarding Neal’s anxious behavior.” State v. Neal, 2016 Ida. App. LEXIS 27 (Feb. 25, 2016).