W.D.La.: RS of drug trafficking here not “rocket science”

Defendant was a passenger in a car asserting no interest in it or the contents. “Diaz never responded to the Government’s standing argument, even after he was given an opportunity to file a post-hearing supplemental brief.” He’d also lose on the merits of the search because the stop was with reasonable suspicion of a traffic offense and then separate reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. United States v. Diaz, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114312 (W.D.La. July 21, 2016), adopted, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114450 (W.D. La. Aug. 24, 2016):

It is true that Strickland and his partners (Troopers Peart, Cason, and others) are highly successful in finding illegal drugs and other contraband following routine traffic stops on I-20. Their past successes may have led to Defendants’ suspicions of a tip. But it is not rocket science to suspect that, when two men who are driving from Houston, Texas to Atlanta, Georgia in a car purchased just days before, after spending only a day in Houston, behave nervously and never or rarely make eye contact, claim to be friends but do not know each other’s name, give conflicting stories about their itinerary, and one has a criminal history for illegal drug activity, criminal activity is probably afoot. It was reasonable to request consent to search the car under such circumstances.