D.Kan.: Stop ended, but officer’s reinitiating conversation was by consent

Officer finished his business during a traffic stop, handed back the paperwork and stepped back, telling defendant to drive carefully, indicating that defendant was free to leave, but then stepped forward to converse again. This second move toward the car was consensual. United States v. Gonzalez-Garcia, 781 F. Supp. 2d 1167 (D. Kan. 2011)*:

11. The court is persuaded that the encounter after the return of the documents was consensual. The court believes that Trooper Trinkle conveyed to Gonzalez-Garcia that he was free to leave after he returned the documents. The comment made by Trooper Trinkle to drive safely coupled with his movement away from the window of the car suggested that the traffic stop had ended. In returning to the window, Trooper Trinkle asked in a conversational tone if he could ask some additional questions. In doing so, he did not physically touch Gonzalez-Garcia or his vehicle, and did not display his weapon. Gonzalez-Garcia readily agreed to answer additional questions. He appeared to do so without reservation. Thus, the court finds no merit to Gonzales-Garcia’s argument that he was detained beyond the permissible scope of the stop.

[Note: I still can’t buy this, no matter how it is dressed up. The officer stopped the defendant. Saying “you’re free to go” but essentially keeping him from it by talking is inherently coercive.]

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.