U.S. v. Cole

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress drugs, as well as his statements made to police officer during traffic stop for following too closely to vehicle. While defendant argued that his 4th Amendment rights were violated because officer unreasonably prolonged stop to allow dog to make drug sniff, by asking travel-plan questions and ultimately directing defendant to drive to nearby gas station, where dog alerted to large quantity of drugs, Ct. of Appeals found that travel-plan questions ordinarily fall within mission of traffic stop. Moreover, Ct. of Appeals held that officer developed reasonable suspicion that defendant was engaging in other criminal activity, where: (1) officer inquired about basic details of defendant’s travel; and (2) defendant, who appeared extremely nervous, gave inconsistent and less-than-forthright answers about his travel and employment. Also, officer developed said reasonable suspicion less than nine minutes after initial stop, which was otherwise lawful. As such, officer had lawful basis for prolonging stop to conduct dog sniff at nearby gas station. (Dissent filed.)