Defendant\u2019s traffic stop was unreasonably extended without reasonable suspicion. \u201cThe Magistrate Judge could see \u2018no objectively logical path of deduction that le[d] to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity\u2019 at the Rodriguez moment. Id. at 2. In coming to this conclusion, the Magistrate Judge considered \u2018the 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.\u2019 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.\u201d Adopted. Essentially, the government sought a divide-and-conquer approach to reasonable suspicion on the totality. It just wasn\u2019t there. United States v. Sanchez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75942 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 22, 2025).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s traffic stop was unreasonably extended without reasonable suspicion. \u201cThe Magistrate Judge could see \u2018no objectively logical path of deduction that le[d] to reasonable suspicion of criminal activity\u2019 at the Rodriguez moment. Id. at 2. In coming to this conclusion, … Continue reading