\u201cAlthough this is a close decision, the Court denies Defendant’s motion. Sergeant Timberlake’s testimony that he stopped Davidoff’s van for a lane change [on an almost vacant interstate highway] does not pass the laugh test. He obviously stopped Davidoff’s vehicle because it was a somewhat beaten-up van with Arizona plates. But while Timberlake stopped the van to search without a warrant, the lane-change gave probable cause. Specifically, the Court finds (1) there is sufficient evidence that probable cause existed to justify the initial traffic stop and (2) the dog sniff was reliable enough to establish probable cause for the search of Defendant’s van.\u201d United States v. Davidoff, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123537 (N.D. Ohio September 3, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cAlthough this is a close decision, the Court denies Defendant’s motion. Sergeant Timberlake’s testimony that he stopped Davidoff’s van for a lane change [on an almost vacant interstate highway] does not pass the laugh test. He obviously stopped Davidoff’s vehicle … Continue reading