CA7: Dog sniff by second officer while first officer wrote ticket didn’t extend stop

The officer with the dog doing the sniff happened while the first officer was writing the ticket, and that made it valid. Even if not, there was reasonable suspicion extending the stop for the dog sniff. United States v. Guidry, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 5322 (7th Cir, March 22, 2016).

Probation officers had reasonable suspicion once inside defendant’s apartment because of his violation of terms of release. “Defendant’s violations of his release conditions by failing to report and lying about the presence of his naked girlfriend, his effort to keep the probation officers out of his apartment or just on the first level of the apartment away from the living area, his seeming violation of the no-excess-alcohol-consumption condition, his question about getting in trouble, his evasive conduct during the home visit, his nervous demeanor, and his visual fixation with the small table combined with the odd placement of the bath towel thereon, in their totality, were sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to believe that Defendant was engaged in criminal activity that he wished to hide from the probation officers.” United States v. Harrison, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34896 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 1, 2016),* adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34682 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 14, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.