S.D.Miss.: Officer detained defendant without RS, consent invalid

Defendant was stopped on I-20 for following too close, and the officer suspected him of transporting persons illegally in the U.S. The stopped dragged on. “The relevant inquiry, however, is at what point the questioning and investigation should have concluded.” The video shows that the officer always had the intent to search the car, and the stop is suppressed because the officer extended the stop without justification. United States v. Alvarado, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142611 (S.D. Miss. October 2, 2013):

3. Was Alvarado’s Detention Constitutional After the Purpose of the Stop Concluded?

In reviewing the video recording and the testimony, it is clear to the Court that Wall intended to search Alvarado’s vehicle at all costs. See VR 17:17 (Wall advising dispatcher that he was going to ask to search the vehicle). To get to that point, Wall would need reasons to detain Alvarado, but the reasons provided at the hearing provide no basis for Alvarado’s continued detention. When initially pulled over, for example, Alvarado complied with Wall’s request. He gave his name, stepped out of the car, went to the rear of his vehicle, and presented his license to Wall. The name on the license was the same as Alvarado had given Wall, and as noted above, the license was in order. There is nothing suspicious about that.10 Alvarado explained that the vehicle was his daughter’s, and that the insurance papers were in the locked glove compartment. He informed Wall that there was a screwdriver in the trunk of the car that could be used to open the glove compartment. Indeed, even after the information from the computer check was clear, Wall continued to detain Alvarado. The government, however, points to other circumstances which it argues caused Wall to have reasonable suspicion and which justified Alvarado’s continued detention.

The Court finds that some of the “discrepancies” that Wall and the government rely on are not supported by objective evidence. As explained below, there were no discrepancies between Alvarado’s and the passengers’ responses regarding who owned the car and their travel destination. …

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.