The juvenile didn’t consent because he was too young to think independently when confronted by police officers. They did, however, have reasonable suspicion for his stop for violating curfew. In re Elijah W., 2017 IL App (1st) 162648, 2017 Ill. App. LEXIS 126 (March 10, 2017) (see Treatise § 12.30 n.9).
Defendant was stopped for a traffic offense, and his DL came back suspended. He was arrested on that. That distinguishes this case from Rodriguez because there was probable cause, and the calling for the drug dog had nothing to do with extending the stop. United States v. Tripps, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33004 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 10, 2017).