Defendant touched the fog line and wasn\u2019t driving erratically. As he explained on the video during the stop, he was concerned that there was a police car staying in his blind spot and he was trying to stay away from it. \u201cEven if Trooper Lee was mistaken in good faith about whether Wendfeldt’s driving violated NRS 484B.223(1), this does not transform the unlawful traffic stop into a lawful one.\u201d Defendant\u2019s alleged obvious nervousness wasn\u2019t apparent on the video. When questioned by the officer he said: \u201cI have no reason for standing here, and I don’t know what you’re doing.\u201d The prolonged seizure was unreasonable. It was not \u201cde minimus.\u201d United States v. Wendfeldt, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157764 (D. Nev. November 7, 2014).<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s curious movement of his pant leg in his apartment was furtive enough for a frisk. Officers had recovered a gun in the same apartment two days earlier. United States v. Loftin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157426 (D. Nev. March 13, 2014).*<\/p>\n
Defendants\u2019 stop away from the border was based on reasonable suspicion, but the officers had no probable cause or consent to search the car. United States v. Gonzales, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157754 (D. Ariz. November 7, 2014).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant touched the fog line and wasn\u2019t driving erratically. As he explained on the video during the stop, he was concerned that there was a police car staying in his blind spot and he was trying to stay away from … Continue reading