CA10: An order to get out of a car does not unreasonably prolong the stop

An order to get out of a car does not unreasonably prolong the stop. United States v. Malone, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 26136 (10th Cir. Aug. 30, 2021). Summarizing the law:

Five other circuits have held in published opinions that unrelated investigations—like inquiries into criminality or dog sniffs—violate the Fourth Amendment only if they prolong the traffic stop. See United States v. Gholston, 1 F.4th 492 (7th Cir. 2021) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge to a dog sniff because the district court did not clearly err “in finding that [the officer] [had] not unlawfully prolong[ed] the stop”); United States v. Buzzard, 1 F.4th 198 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating that even if the law-enforcement officer’s question had “exceeded the scope of the stop’s mission,” the question would have “passe[d] constitutional muster” because it hadn’t prolonged the traffic stop); United States v. Yusuf, 993 F.3d 167, 182–83 (3d Cir. 2021) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge because the traffic stop had not been prolonged in light of the driver’s need to continue looking for the registration and proof of insurance); United States v. Lott, 954 F.3d 919, 924–25 (6th Cir. 2020) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge because a law-enforcement officer’s “questions about criminal activity unrelated to the traffic stop” did not prolong the traffic stop); United States v. Fuehrer, 844 F.3d 767, 773 (8th Cir. 2016) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge to a dog sniff because the officers were still completing paperwork). In unpublished opinions, four other circuits have reached the same conclusion. See Negrito v. Buonaugurio, 836 F. App’x 36, 39 (2d Cir. 2020) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge because the defendant had not adequately alleged extension of the traffic stop from unrelated inquiries); United States v. Gladney, 809 F. App’x 220, 226 (5th Cir. 2020) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge to unrelated questions because the officer was waiting for resolution of safety concerns); United States v. Kash, 751 F. App’x 1007, 1010 (9th Cir. 2018) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge to unrelated questions because related checks were ongoing); United States v. Rivas, 746 F. App’x 826, 828–29 (11th Cir. 2018) (rejecting a Fourth Amendment challenge to a dog sniff, reasoning that the officer had ongoing inquiries relating to a traffic violation).

This entry was posted in Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.