E.D.Tex.: Gov’t divide-and-conquer RS effort rejected

Defendant’s traffic stop was unreasonably extended without reasonable suspicion. “The Magistrate Judge could see ‘no objectively logical path of deduction that le[d] to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity’ at the Rodriguez moment. Id. at 2. In coming to this conclusion, the Magistrate Judge considered ‘the totality of the circumstances that existed both before the stop and during the initial eleven minutes of the stop-Sanchez’s nervousness and previous presence in high crime areas.’ Id. at 1-2 (citing United States v. Monsivais, 848 F.3d 353, 363 (5th Cir. 2017)). Because Officer Gonzalez did not have reasonable suspicion that a crime other than the traffic infraction had been, was being, or was about to be committed, the Magistrate Judge concluded that Officer Gonzalez could not prolong the traffic stop to wait for the K-9 unit to arrive and perform the free-air sniff. Id. at 2. The Magistrate Judge therefore found that the seizure violated Sanchez’s rights under the Fourth Amendment, and recommended that the evidence obtained therefrom, including the handgun found after the K-9 alerted to the presence of drugs in the car, be suppressed. Id.” Adopted. Essentially, the government sought a divide-and-conquer approach to reasonable suspicion on the totality. It just wasn’t there. United States v. Sanchez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75942 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 22, 2025).*