David Carter v. Monte Hamaoui
699 F. App'x 519
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- On Aug. 22, 2013 Carter (driver) and Thomson (passenger) drove a loaded 2007 GMC flatbed east on I‑90 toward Cleveland carrying scrap metal and bales of aluminum cans; Carter set cruise control ~55 mph.
- DEA received an anonymous tip that a flatbed with aluminum cans on I‑90 was carrying marijuana; Rocky River officers were told to “make your own PC.”
- Officer Hamaoui followed and stopped the truck citing slow speed, alleged weaving, and apparent bulging tires (suspected overweight). Dashcam shows the truck moving ~50–53 mph and no clear weaving during the recorded period.
- A state trooper’s certified drug dog (Paco) circled the truck and alerted; a second dog (Storm) later did not alert. Officers searched on the roadside (no contraband found), towed the truck to a garage, weighed it (26,100 lbs), cited for overweight, and later conducted a thorough search (no narcotics recovered).
- Plaintiffs sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Fourth Amendment violations; district court granted summary judgment to officers on qualified immunity grounds. The Sixth Circuit reversed in part and affirmed in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of the initial traffic stop (reasonable suspicion) | Hamaoui lacked articulable facts tying observations to an ongoing traffic crime; tip alone was insufficient | Officer had reasonable suspicion from slow speed, weaving, bulging tires, visible load, and the CI tip | Reversed as to Hamaoui: disputed material facts and objectively insufficient basis to conclude reasonable suspicion for overweight or other violations (video and lack of officer expertise undermine defendants’ position) |
| Sufficiency of anonymous tip to justify stop | Tip described observable features only, not concealed criminal activity | Tip alerted officers to possible drug transport and supported stop in combination with observations | Tip alone insufficient; officers acknowledged they needed to “make their own PC” — tip did not supply reasonable suspicion |
| Probable cause from Paco’s alert for roadside search | Paco was cued by handler or alert occurred only on second pass; Storm’s failure undermines reliability | Paco was certified; video shows alert before the handler’s reward toy moved; certification supports presumption of reliability | Affirmed for Baker: certified canine alert provided probable cause to search on the roadside despite second dog’s non‑alert and timing of alert |
| Warrantless subsequent search at garage (automobile exception) | Moving truck and then conducting an extensive search exceeded permissible scope without warrant | Once probable cause existed, police could move vehicle for safe, thorough search; automobile exception and caretaking authority allow warrantless stationhouse searches | Affirmed: probable cause that existed at the scene carried over to the garage; warrant not required for the subsequent search |
| Qualified immunity for officers | Officers violated clearly established Fourth Amendment rights by conducting an unlawful stop | Actions were reasonable under precedent; qualified immunity applies | Hamaoui not entitled to qualified immunity on stop (genuine fact disputes and lack of legal justification); Baker entitled to qualified immunity for canine‑based searches (probable cause) |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (establishes objective test for qualified immunity)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (stop-and-frisk standard; hunches insufficient)
- Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (anonymous tip describing observable facts insufficient to establish probable cause)
- Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (anonymous tip plus corroboration can supply reasonable suspicion)
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (contemporaneous, traceable 911 calls may support reasonable suspicion)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (prolonging traffic stop for dog sniff without reasonable suspicion violates Fourth Amendment)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (objective approach to probable cause and arrests)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (reasonable mistake of law can, in some circumstances, justify seizure)
- Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (certification/testing of drug dogs can establish reliability for probable cause)
- United States v. Perez, 440 F.3d 363 (6th Cir. — one dog’s non‑alert does not necessarily negate another dog’s earlier alert)
- United States v. Graham, 275 F.3d 490 (6th Cir. — automobile exception and stationhouse searches)
- Reid Mach. Inc. v. Lanzer, [citation="421 F. App'x 497"] (6th Cir. — weight‑enforcement stops justified where officers had weight‑enforcement experience and several indicia of overweight truck)