Defendant’s 40 minute detention waiting for a drug dog was without reasonable suspicion. None of the individual factors of reasonable suspicion relied upon by the government was reasonable suspicion in itself and even not on the totality. Oklahoma plates in Northern Texas, visiting a house where a drug deal occurred the day before, and staying only 20 minutes [wouldn’t a drug deal have been far less?] The forty minute detention was unreasonable. United States v. Spears, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 1032 (5th Cir. Jan. 21, 2016).

Defendant’s 34 minute detention waiting for the drug dog was without reasonable suspicion. Defendant had picked up a package from the USPS that was for another person, but he had the notice card and signed for it, signing the other name, and the package smelled of dryer sheets, and the address of the shipper was suspect in the USPS database, but it was hardly complete. No RS even on the totality. He was stopped on a traffic offense, but nothing happened toward a search of the box because there was no probable cause to search it or the car, so the police called for a drug dog which took another 15 minutes to arrive. Defendant’s nervousness wasn’t a factor because he wasn’t nervous until the police announced a drug dog was called for. MackIntrush v. State, 2016 Ark. 14 (Jan. 21, 2016) (4-3).

“Based on the totality of the circumstances, Trooper Steeves had a reasonable, articulable suspicion that someone in the vehicle had recently smoked marijuana and that Defendant, as the vehicle’s sole occupant, was the likely source of both the odor and presence of marijuana. Although Trooper Steeves did not plan to arrest Defendant for the marijuana flake he initially observed in the vehicle, he had a reasonable suspicion that other contraband may be uncovered if the vehicle was searched. It was therefore reasonable for Trooper Steeves to ask Defendant if he would consent to a search of the vehicle to quickly dispel or confirm that suspicion. See United States v. Bailey, 743 F.3d 322, 336 (2d Cir. 2014) (‘In assessing whether a detention is too long or intrusive to be justified as an investigative stop, courts properly “examine whether the police diligently pursued a means of investigation that was likely to confirm or dispel their suspicions quickly.”’). Because the traffic stop in this case was not unreasonably prolonged under the Fourth Amendment, Defendant’s motion to suppress on that basis is DENIED.” United States v. Delille, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5886 (D.Vt. Jan. 19, 2016).

There was an abandoned vehicle, and defendant was in the vicinity, standing in the road talking to a local resident, out of breath and sweating. The resident didn’t know him. Things didn’t add up to the officer, so he called for backup and handcuffed the defendant. At the time of handcuffing, the officer did not have reasonable suspicion, even for officer safety. Nothing came of the encounter that suggested defendant was involved in anything criminal or had anything on him that was criminal. Croissy v. State, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 727 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 20, 2016).

Officers had reasonable suspicion to look in a car for a gun after being called to a domestic dispute involving a gun. When no gun was found on defendant, a witness said there was a gun in his car. United States v. Fonville, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175027 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 5, 2015),* adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6788 (E.D.N.C. Jan. 19, 2016).*

Defendant consented to a search of his car during a traffic stop, and defendant took a deputy up on an offer to sit inside the patrol vehicle during the search. That led to a frisk because the officer would have his back on him, and a gun was found on defendant when officers frisked him. The officers’ concerns for their own safety gave them reasonable suspicion to frisk defendant since the deputy had to turn his back on defendant and the passenger to search the car. The presence of the backup officer did not entirely abate the danger that defendant posed to the officers, and additional circumstances existed that justified reasonable suspicion, including the passenger’s arrest warrants and suspicious behavior, and the high-crime area. United States v. Fager, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 995 (10th Cir. Jan. 21, 2016).