Background

• Ward, charged with felony possession of marijuana after search of vehicle from accident scene; officer used a canine sweep and obtained marijuana evidence; Ward moved to suppress both evidence and statements; district court denied; Ward entered a conditional guilty plea reserving appeal on the suppression ruling; on appeal, Ward challenges only the drug-dog evidence under Florida v. Harris, and the State argues lack of preservation; court notes Ward did not preserve the dog-credential issue and waives review under conditional plea.
• Officer Dillard used a free-air sniff by a certified drug dog after directing another officer to issue a citation to the other driver; dog indicated near the rear driver’s side door; search yielded marijuana and hash; Ward made statements during and after the sniff.
• Ward did not challenge the dog’s certification or reliability at suppression hearing; district court did not address dog-credibility because not raised; Ward filed motion to reconsider with video evidence; Ward entered a conditional guilty plea under Rule 11(a)(2) reserving review of pretrial motions; on appeal, court confines review to whether dog-evidence was preserved and properly challenged.
• Court reviews suppression rulings: factual findings reviewed for clear error; ultimate legality of search reviewed de novo; issue here is preservation of dog-evidence challenge; Ward failed to preserve and thus cannot obtain review.
• Ward abandoned the argument that the dog's certification undermined the search; Florida v. Harris issue not preserved; conditional-plea waiver rules bar new issues not raised in district court; only exception is Rule 11(a)(2) reservation, which Ward did not properly exercise for this issue.
• Conclusion: the issue is not preserved; Court affirms denial of suppression.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Morgan v. State, 95 P.3d 802 (Wy. 2004) (waiver of appellate review on non-jurisdictional claims after guilty plea (except Rule 11(a)(2)))
• Custer v. State, 135 P.3d 620 (Wy. 2006) (conforms to waiver rules after conditional plea)
• Lindsay v. State, 108 P.3d 852 (Wy. 2005) (non-jurisdictional claims not preserved do not survive plea)
• Kunselman v. State, 188 P.3d 567 (Wy. 2008) (further authority on preservation after plea)
• Tucker v. State, 214 P.3d 236 (Wy. 2009) (preservation limitations after plea)
• Sen v. State, 301 P.3d 106 (Wy. 2013) (standard for suppression review; de novo around ultimate legality)