N.D.Ind.: There was PC for stop, and pretext claim was speculative and didn’t merit hearing

Defendant’s claim that the officer was acting pretextually in stopping him is speculative at best. “Mr. Ellis also argues that the traffic stop was pretextual. However, an officer’s ‘actual motivations’ and ‘[s]ubjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis.’ Whren, 517 U.S. at 813. Therefore, even if the traffic stop was pretextual, it does not alter the Court’s conclusion that Lt. Bartlett had probable cause to initiate the traffic stop.” One doesn’t automatically get a hearing to flesh out speculation. As for prolonging the stop, it was reasonable based on the return on insurance information which defendant’s wasn’t carrying. United States v. Ellis, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48991 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 18, 2025).*

“Upon learning that Mr. Binion’s license was suspended, the officers had probable cause to arrest him for driving with a suspended license. The officers then searched Mr. Binion, which the officers were permitted to do under the search incident to arrest exception to the warrant requirement. See Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435, 449 (2013). When the officers recovered suspected narcotics and money from Mr. Binion’s pockets, the officers then had probable cause to believe that Mr. Binion committed a crime involving controlled substances. Mr. Binion’s arrest was therefore lawful.” Then the vehicle search was permitted, too. United States v. Binion, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48999 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 18, 2025).*

This entry was posted in Pretext, Search incident. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.