U.S. v. Ahmed

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress drugs seized from his RV following discussion that defendant had with police officer at truck stop. Record showed that: (1) officer observed defendant driving RV on Interstate with dirty license plate and followed defendant into truck-stop parking lot; (2) after store employee told officer that defendant and his passenger were acting strangely, officer asked defendant if he could speck with him and told him that he could leave at any time; (3) defendant agreed to speak with officer, and officer eventually asked for defendant’s driver’s license and rental agreement for RV; (4) defendant gave officer his driver’s license and said rental agreement, and officer asked defendant for consent to search RV and defendant agreed; (5) officer thereafter called for K-9 dog unit; (6) when K-9 unit arrived defendant consented to dog sniff of RV; and (7) dog quickly alerted to presence of drugs and officer thereafter searched RV and found large quantity of marijuana. While defendant argued that instant search violated his 4th Amendment rights because he was effectively seized when officer had retained his driver’s license and RV rental agreement, Dist. Ct. could properly find that : (1) defendant had voluntarily consented to both external dog sniff and search of RV during encounter that lasted approximately 15 minutes; and (2) defendant’s encounter with officer did not become seizure until dog alerted to presence of drugs. Ct. rejected defendant’s contention that consensual encounter with officer necessarily became seizure as soon as officer took possession of his driver’s license.