W.D.Ky.: Backup officer to traffic stop immediately used drug dog, and that wasn’t unreasonable

Defendants’ failure to stop at stop signs was justification for the stop. A backup officer with a drug dog did a dog sniff around the car while the basic stuff of the traffic stop was being done. This did not violate Rodriguez because it didn’t extend the stop at all. United States v. Miles, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67922 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 23, 2018).

There is no reasonable expectation of privacy in one’s name and DL during a traffic stop. United States v. Zavala, 541 F.3d 562, 577 (5th Cir. 2008). Even if the traffic stop was without reasonable suspicion, there is no fruit of the poisonous tree argument to keep it from ICE. “See United States v. Cervantes-Malagon, 457 F. App’x 364, 365 (5th Cir. 2012) (‘Furthermore, even if there was a Fourth Amendment violation, this court has held that evidence of identity, such as one’s fingerprints and A-file, is not suppressible.’).” United States v. Rodriguez-Garcia, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67463 (W.D. Tex. Apr. 23, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Exclusionary rule. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.