S.D.Ga.: Drug dog de minimus intrusion where slight delay in arrival

Drug dog was a de minimus intrusion where the dog arrived just as the paperwork on the traffic offense was completed. United States v. Brooks, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104892 (S.D. Ga. April 23, 2009).*

Impoundment of defendant’s moped on his custodial arrest was reasonable although it was parked on private property. United States v. Cauthen, 669 F. Supp. 2d 629 (M.D. N.C. 2009).*

Defendants’ continued stop was reasonable where they were going in the wrong direction from their stated route and they were inconsistent in their travel plans. United States v. Cruz, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105283 (S.D. Miss. October 21, 2009)*:

Courts have established that mere uneasy feelings on the part of the officer or inconsistent stories between a driver and passenger cannot, standing alone, provide reasonable suspicion to extend an otherwise lawful detention. Cavitt, 550 F.3d at 437; Estrada, 459 F.3d at 631. However, the facts previously stated, considered in conjunction with the officers’ narcotics interdiction training, on-the-job experience consisting of over 100 interdiction traffic stops and knowledge that Interstate 20 between Meridian, Mississippi, and Atlanta, Georgia, is a common drug-trafficking route, would create in the mind of a reasonable police officer and in fact did create for Officer Hill, reasonable suspicion for further inquiry.

The government did not need to obtain a judicially authorized warrant to have a CI get into defendant’s car to make a controlled buy. United States v. Tate, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104968 (E.D. Tenn. October 7, 2009)* (this issue did not justify the time the court spent on it, but it is a thorough discussion if anyone is interested).

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.