CA8: Stop unreasonably extended for drug dog; denial of suppression reversed

Window tint violation should have taken 5-6 minutes, but it dragged out for 20 minutes while the drug dog was coming. The stop was overlong under Rodriguez and the motion to suppress should have been granted. United States v. Johnson, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4254 (8th Cir. Feb. 12, 2026) (2-1; this was under submission 3¾ years; no person with same name in custody in BOP).

Officers had [plenty of] probable cause for defendant’s vehicle stop and search in an ongoing drug operation. United States v. Gregory, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28454 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 11, 2026).*

Defendant’s LPN was tracked on the Oklahoma Turnpike two days after his arrest. There’s no reasonable expectation of privacy in ALPR. He argued it was real time tracking, but it wasn’t. United States v. Schoggins, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28417 (E.D. Okla. Jan. 28, 2026).*

The USMJ said the evidence should be suppressed for an illegal entry that turned out to be clearly justified by the emergency exception. The District Court obliged. The government appealed and reversed. The exclusionary rule should not have been applied here. United States v. Leonard, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 4228 (5th Cir. Feb. 11, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Automatic license plate readers, Dog sniff, Emergency / exigency, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.