M.D.Fla.: Briefly asking about “illegal narcotics” during a traffic stop not unreasonable because of fentanyl

Asking a stopped motorist about whether there were illegal drugs in the car was a question of officer safety because of fentanyl. “The questions here primarily involved the presence of weapons, although Officer Ragusa very briefly mentioned ‘illegal narcotics.’ The officer’s mere reference to ‘illegal narcotics’ is insufficient to change the outcome here. First, the question about illegal narcotics is also related to officer safety since exposure to certain narcotics may present a risk to officers, including potential adverse health effects.” United States v. Green, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122740 (M.D. Fla. July 17, 2023).

Plaintiff’s patdown in the jail was intrusive and even involved touching her breast, but it wasn’t unreasonable. “ To the extent that Plaintiff intended to allege that this pat-down search violated the Fourth Amendment, as explained below, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim. Plaintiff’s allegations suggest that the pat-down was conducted while Plaintiff was clothed, and a pat-down search is necessarily intrusive, even sexually intrusive.” Spoors v. Kent Cnty. Corr. Facility, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121842 (W.D. Mich. July 14, 2023).*

The officer knew that an owner of the vehicle had warrants. When he saw the driver, the operator was close enough by description to the owner to justify the stop. When defendant got out of the car, marijuana was seen on his person. United States v. Heard, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121861 (E.D. N.C. July 14, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Prison and jail searches, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.