Huff v. Reichert

Dist Ct. did not err in denying defendant-police officer’s motion for summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds in section 1983 action alleging that defendant subjected plaintiff to false arrest and unreasonable seizure when defendant stopped vehicle in which plaintiff was passenger, and, after issuing warning ticket for alleged traffic offense, spent additional 34 minutes conducting pat-down search of both defendant and driver of vehicle, as well as subjecting vehicle to dog sniff and search of vehicle that produced no drugs. Ct. of Appeals lacked subject matter jurisdiction over much of defendant’s appeal, where denial of summary judgment motion was based on Dist. Ct.’s finding of existence of disputed facts. Moreover, from plaintiff viewpoint, record otherwise established that defendant lacked reasonable suspicion to stop vehicle or probable cause to search plaintiff/vehicle where: (1) plaintiff claimed that defendant did not observe any traffic offense; and (2) justification for search was fact that vehicle contained out-of-state plates and was driving on stretch of highway where much drug trafficking occurs. Fact that driver of vehicle had prior arrest for marijuana cultivation did not require different result.