E.D.Mo.: No blanket rule passengers can be asked pedigree questions during traffic stop

There is no blanket rule that passengers in a traffic stop can be asked their pedigree information. The cases the government rely on are pre-Rodriguez and of no real value. Here, those questions extended the stop. United States v. Wright, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69856 (E.D.Mo. Apr. 15, 2022) (R&R):

The undersigned can imagine a variety of circumstances in which an officer conducting a traffic stop may need to ask a passenger for identification and run a record check to complete the mission of the traffic stop and attend to related safety concerns. However, in this case, there was no evidence presented to suggest that Officer Eilerman needed to obtain (or reasonably required) the identification of Wright or the female passenger to complete the mission of the traffic stop or to address safety concerns. See United States v. Landeros, 913 F.3d 862, 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (holding the identity of a passenger ordinarily has “no relation to a driver’s safe operation of a vehicle” and knowing the passenger’s name “would not have made the officers any safer” instead, “[e]xtending the stop, and thereby prolonging the officers’ exposure to [the passenger] was, if anything, inversely related to officer safety”).

Indeed, there was no evidence presented in this case to suggest that Officer Eilerman’s inquiry was in response to specific concerns related to officer safety or specific things that unfolded during the traffic stop at all. Instead, when Wright asked Eilerman why he wanted his information, Eilerman responded “this is an investigation” he told Wright they were “being detained” because of the plates and so “I have to investigate everybody in the car.” At the evidentiary hearing, Officer Eilerman explained that it was a “routine practice” of his department to ask passengers who are not operating the vehicle for identification and to run the names of such passengers “just to see if they have any active warrants.” See Doc. 51 (Hrng. Tr., at p. 25).

In sum, although there are certainly circumstances in which an officer’s request for a passenger’s identification may be reasonably required to complete the mission of a traffic stop or attend to safety concerns, those circumstances are not present in this case. Based on the evidence adduced at the evidentiary hearing, Officer Eilerman’s investigation of Wright (and the female passenger) was more akin to an unrelated criminal investigation than a task necessary to address safety or effectuate the purpose of the stop.