Where Customs officers clearly had reasonable suspicion to detain plaintiff for alimentary canal smuggling after her two day trip and her return flight had been diverted to FLL. She was eight months pregnant (precluding x-rays, a nifty trick of the smuggler recruiters) and when questioned, she exhibited extreme nervousness, sweating, and had to hold onto the x-ray machine to steady herself, and she had no luggage for her trip. Before she was stopped, she was obviously avoiding all eye contact with Customs officers, and that piqued their interest in her. Her information in the Customs computer showed she was targeted for questioning because of her trip:
REFER TO CUSTOMS FOR ENFORCEMENT EXAM.
ACQUIRED TRAVEL DOCUMENTS SHORTLY BEFORE
DEPARTURE. MATCHES HI RISK NARCO-TARGETING
INDICATORS. (IF ARRIVING FROM A SOURCE COUNTRY).
The Customs officer first searched her carry-on bag.
Friedland proceeded to search through Denson’s belongings–a manila folder, a purse, and a small carry-on bag. Of note, Denson had in her possession two new $100 bills and six $1 bills, a marriage register of the marriage between herself and Scott, an affidavit of citizenship in lieu of a passport, and a tablet of paper containing the following hand-written information about her husband that appeared to be a cover story written for Denson by a third party:
Richard Scott — Poultry Farmer Since 1994
Lives (a) Belfast Near Morant Bay in the Parish of Saint Thomas
His birthday is: Feb. 17th (Born 1972)
How you met.
Dec. 1995 A friend invited you to Jamaica while there went to the beach Dunns River met him there
Dec. 1996 He visited you at your friends Saint Anne home you invited him at his Saint Thomas home
*You had no prior knowledge of him
You returned home to Florida — Telephone Exchange
*Always used calling cards — Price Reasons
March 1996 You went down to visit him in Jamaica.
Oct. 1996 You went back to marry him
*His phone number written down at home 809 something
You are not good with remembering numbers.
*NOT HIS PHONE ANYWAY Neighbors’ Phone.
ANY OTHER Questions Just answer something in that case try to remember what you were asked and what you answered.
*DOES HE HAVE RELATIVES OR FRIENDS IN THE U.S. THAT YOU KNOW OF –NO–
When asked who wrote the document, Denson said that she did not know.
Plaintiff later claimed she had seven different handwriting styles. Her detention and removal to a hospital for a forced enema was reasonable under all the circumstances, despite the fact nothing was recovered. Denson v. United States, 574 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2009):
If, after conducting initial questioning and a preliminary search of the individual and the individual’s effects, the officer has reasonable suspicion that the traveler is smuggling drugs in her alimentary canal, the Fourth Amendment permits the Customs officer to detain the individual and conduct a more intrusive search. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. at 541-42, 105 S. Ct. at 3310-11 (allowing detention of traveler based on reasonable suspicion of smuggling contraband in her alimentary canal); United States v. Pino, 729 F.2d 1357, 1359 (11th Cir. 1984) (finding use of x-ray to search traveler constitutional where reasonable suspicion exists that person is concealing drugs internally); see United States v. Himmelwright, 551 F.2d 991, 994 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 434 U.S. 902, 98 S. Ct. 298, 54 L. Ed. 2d 189 (1977) (permitting strip search of border entrant based upon reasonable suspicion). Similarly, once an officer gains reasonable suspicion that a traveler is smuggling drugs in her alimentary canal, it is constitutionally reasonable for the officer to detain the traveler for a period of time necessary to either verify or dispel his suspicion. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. at 544, 105 S. Ct. at 3312; Gonzalez-Rincon, 36 F.3d at 864.
Nothing was found after she spent nearly a full day in custody. She sued and lost because there was reasonable suspicion for her detention at Customs. She sued everybody involved.
This case was clearly distinguishable from unjustified detentions at the border.
n64. As both Friedland and Lavenka acknowledged, as a pregnant, black female traveling alone from a brief stay in Jamaica, Denson fit a stereotypical profile. And if Friedland and Lavenka based their decision to search and have Denson detained to monitor her bowel movements solely on those facts, this would be a different case. See Brent v. Odesta, 247 F.3d 1294, 1302 (11th Cir. 2001) (finding officers lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct a strip search and an x-ray examination based on the traveler having arrived from a source country and shaking her head at inspectors who had detained another passenger); United States v. Vega-Barvo, 729 F.2d 1341, 1349 (11th Cir. 1984) (“It is not the profile, however, but the factors which make up the profile which are crucial to whether or not there is a reasonable suspicion.”) However, Friedland and Lavenka’s decisions were based not only on a basic profile; but also on Denson’s nervous behavior, the dubious nature of Denson’s answers to basic questions, and other factors–most notably, the third-party authored cover story.
