“As previously noted, this Court must pay great deference to a magistrate’s determination of probable cause and must take a common-sense approach rather than a hyper-technical approach. Nonetheless, given the totality of the circumstances set forth in the Affidavit, including the absence of any indicated relevant training or experience and the failure to describe the likelihood of recovery of DNA from the seized evidence, this Court finds that the Affidavit in question fails to establish a fair probability that Defendant’s DNA can be linked to a crime. Therefore, the warrant for Defendant’s DNA is not supported by probable cause.” State v. Bell, 2019 Del. Super. LEXIS 421 (Aug. 28, 2019).
The delay in the stop to 18 minutes was largely because the passenger didn’t have any identification and it took longer just to get her information verified. Therefore, the extension of the stop was reasonable. United States v. Hamilton, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147915 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 30, 2019).*