W.D.Ky.: Officer’s verifying def’s identity reasonably extended the stop

The extension of the stop wasn’t based on reasonable suspicion; it was the officer trying to determine why defendant’s license was revoked and whether defendant was who he said he was. “Under these circumstances, it is clear that the mission of the stop was incomplete up to the point that Stevens consented to the search of his vehicle. Thus, the length of the stop did not violate Stevens’s rights in any way.” United States v. Stevens, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190842 (W.D. Ky. Nov. 4, 2019).

Defendant wasn’t under arrest nor was it even suggested to him that he was, so how could he flee arrest? Moreover, the police had no cause for an arrest. The claim that the officers said they smelled marijuana to justify the arrest of a nearby car that briefly stopped and drove off, a fact never noted in any paperwork or a search warrant application, “strains credibility.” United States v. Howard, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190999 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 4, 2019).

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.