N.D.Ind.: The officers’ use of conversational speech in describing defendant’s driving was not so vague that it did not show RS

The officers’ use of conversational speech in describing defendant’s driving was not so vague that it did not show reasonable suspicion. “While Burnett argues that Officer Fuhrman and Officer Winston failed to articulate facts supporting reasonable suspicion to justify the stop, because of the words ‘looked like,’ ‘I guess,’ and ‘basically,’ etc., Burnett places too much emphasis on what is normal speech and appears to be stretching to find an argument for suppressing the evidence. The officers’ testimony makes it clear that they witnessed Burnett violate two traffic laws, by driving at an unreasonable speed and failing to properly signal a turn, which justified the officers’ stop of the vehicle.” United States v. Burnett, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37771 (N.D. Ind. Feb. 22, 2016).

While defendant denied consent to search his car, the officer credibly testified that he smelled marijuana coming from it, and that justified its search. Brenes v. State, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 2943 (Tex.App. – Texarkana March 23, 2016).*