D.Neb.: Roadside questioning in the patrol car doesn’t matter

“Also, the fact that Gardea was questioned in the patrol car is of no consequence. ‘An officer making a traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment by asking the driver his destination and purpose, checking the license and registration, or requesting the driver to step over to the patrol car.’ United States v. Linkous, 285 F.3d 716, 719 (8th Cir. 2002).” [Linkous was mine.] United States v. Gonzalez-Gardea, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237158 (D. Neb. Dec. 17, 2020). [What if it’s cold or rainy?]

“Probable cause that a driver has committed any traffic violation, no matter how minor, provides sufficient justification under the Fourth Amendment to stop a vehicle and handcuff and arrest the driver. Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 354-55 (2001). The officer’s subjective motivation is irrelevant. Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006). Even if the officer was influenced by an impermissible motive, a traffic stop does not violate the driver’s rights under the Fourth Amendment to be free from unreasonable seizures, as long as the circumstances, viewed objectively, justified the seizure. Id.; Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996).” United States v. Neal, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 237144 (E.D. Ark. Dec. 17, 2020).*

Failure to signal a turn until after coming to a full stop justifies a stop under Indiana law. The trial court erred in finding not. State v. Torres, 2020 Ind. App. LEXIS 537 (Dec. 17, 2020).*

Failure to stay in one’s lane justifies a traffic stop. State v. Williams, 2020-Ohio-6755, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 4591 (5th Dist. Dec. 17, 2020).*