Gibson v. State, 438 P.3d 1256

Background

Trooper Pittsley stopped Gibson on I-80 for lack of visible vehicle registration; Gibson produced a faded paper registration taped to the windshield.
Pittsley observed Gibson acting "excessively nervous" and asked him to retrieve the paper and sit in the patrol car while dispatch checks were run.
About 15–17 minutes into the stop, after Pittsley and his partner attempted to verify registration and continued preparing a warning citation, Pittsley deployed a police dog for a free-air sniff of the trailer; the dog alerted.
A subsequent search of the trailer uncovered ~197 pounds of vacuum-sealed marijuana; Gibson was charged with possession with intent to deliver and related counts, then entered a conditional guilty plea reserving the suppression issue.
The district court denied Gibson’s suppression motion; the Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the initial traffic stop was lawful	Gibson conceded initial stop but argued the stop had a pretextual "air" relevant to state-constitutional analysis	State: stop was lawful because lack of visible registration justified seizure	Held: Initial stop lawful under Fourth Amendment (and conceded by Gibson)
Whether the dog sniff/search unreasonably extended the stop	Gibson argued the sniff/search unconstitutionally prolonged the stop and required tighter protection under the Wyoming Constitution	State: sniff occurred while citation unfinished and did not extend the stop; exterior sniff isn’t a search under federal law	Held: Exterior dog sniff did not unreasonably extend stop; permissible under Fourth Amendment
Whether Wyoming Constitution requires greater protection for exterior dog sniffs	Gibson urged a stricter state-constitutional rule due to pretextual concern	State argued Gibson waived/failed to present cogent state-constitutional argument	Held: Court declined to apply a separate Wyoming-constitutional rule because Gibson did not present cogent, preserved argument and precedent treats officer motive as irrelevant if violation justified stop
Preservation and appellate review standard	Gibson contended state-constitutional analysis needed; appellate review of suppression ruling is de novo for legal questions	State: failure to preserve or brief cogent state-constitutional claim	Held: Court applied deferential review to factual findings, de novo to legal issues, and refused to consider an unpreserved/uncogent state-constitutional challenge

Key Cases Cited

Kennison v. State, 417 P.3d 146 (Wyo. 2018) (standard of review for suppression rulings and Terry analysis)
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (exterior dog sniff during a traffic stop is not a search under the Fourth Amendment)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (two-part reasonableness inquiry for stops and seizures)
Clay v. State, 372 P.3d 195 (Wyo. 2016) (traffic stop justified by lack of visible registration)
Wallace v. State, 221 P.3d 967 (Wyo. 2009) (dog sniff at vehicle exterior permissible absent reasonable suspicion if it doesn’t extend stop)
Harris v. State, 409 P.3d 1251 (Wyo. 2018) (no fixed time limit for traffic stops; diligence standard governs permissible length)
Fertig v. State, 146 P.3d 492 (Wyo. 2006) (officer's primary motivation is irrelevant when observed violation justifies a stop)