\u201cThe Court finds this stop was constitutional. There was reasonable suspicion that justified the prolonged detention. The arresting officer, Texas Department of Public Safety State Trooper John Loftin, developed reasonable suspicion during the course of the stop. The driver of the vehicle, Cory Barton, struggled to respond to basic questions about the itinerary of his trip to and from Houston. \u2026 These include a failure to recall the name of his hotel, where his destination was in relation to Houston, and what type of car he had just worked on. Id. Mr. Barton also stuttered when giving at least one of those responses. \u2026 During Trooper Loftin’s questioning of Ms. Booth, Mr. Barton interrupted to show Trooper Loftin a receipt to establish that he \u2018wasn’t lying.\u2019 \u2026 Going out of your way to interrupt someone to show proof of a trip is unusual behavior. The struggle to recall basic questions, his stuttering, and his interruption of Ms. Booth to provide proof of his trip all created reasonable suspicion to Trooper Loftin.\u201d United States v. Booth, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66232 (W.D.Tex. Apr. 11, 2022),* R&R 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66308 (W.D.Tex. Feb. 22, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cThe Court finds this stop was constitutional. There was reasonable suspicion that justified the prolonged detention. The arresting officer, Texas Department of Public Safety State Trooper John Loftin, developed reasonable suspicion during the course of the stop. The driver of … Continue reading