CA4: Govt conceded delay for dog, but can’t show it was with RS

The government concedes that there was delay during the stop, but it was all without reasonable suspicion. The officer was looking for other summonses on defendant, including child support orders, where he had no idea there were any. “Finally, Deputy Porter prolonged the stop when he finished issuing the citation but required Appellant to wait for the results of the dog sniff. It is undisputed that the traffic stop was over when Appellant asked to leave, but Rinehart took ‘roughly a minute’ to put the dog back and report the positive alert to Porter.” United States v. Podbielski, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 19772 (4th Cir. Aug. 1, 2023).

While the state constitution provides more protection than the Fourth Amendment and could apply in an administrative proceeding, it was not violated here. The search was by consent. Walters v. Bd. on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Training, 2023 Miss. App. LEXIS 279 (Aug. 1, 2023).

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.