CA10: Direction to turn off engine and close window was reasonable

During a valid traffic stop, telling the driver to close the window and shut off the engine before the dog sniff was reasonable here and did not make it more of a seizure. United States v. Pina, 386 Fed. Appx. 792 (10th Cir. 2010) (unpublished)*:

Pina and Lajara contend a different result is warranted here because Owen asked Lajara to close the window and turn off the vehicle before he walked his dog around the vehicle. We disagree. While we recognize the possibility an officer’s instruction to close a window or turn off an engine could be seen as an unreasonable exercise of dominion and control in some circumstances, 4 we agree with the district court that these requests were reasonable here. As the court explained: “There’s no reason for that car to be running while this search is going on with a passenger inside the car. It would be very simple for the passenger to move over and take off[.]” (R. Vol. II at 74.) And Owen testified he instructed Lajara to close the window in order to prevent his dog-an aggressive dog-from jumping in the window and potentially causing harm to Lajara. Considering Owen’s instructions in the light of “common sense and ordinary human experience,” United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 685, 105 S. Ct. 1568, 84 L. Ed. 2d 605 (1985), they did not unreasonably or unnecessarily prolong the detention. Like the detention at issue in Patterson, Pina and Lajara’s detention was reasonable in scope and duration.