Moberly v. Commonwealth, 551 S.W.3d 26

At 3:35 a.m. Lexington Officer Sorrell stopped a vehicle whose registration had been cancelled for lack of insurance; Rakim Moberly was the driver.
Sorrell took Moberly's license, returned to his cruiser, and spent about five minutes checking a jail website and a police database; those checks showed prior charges (not convictions) for trafficking and carrying a concealed weapon.
Back at the vehicle, Sorrell asked about drugs/weapons; Moberly denied and refused consent to search. Sorrell then delayed issuing a citation and called a drug-sniffing canine.
The canine arrived within minutes, alerted on the driver’s side, and officers searched the car, finding cocaine/methylone in a cigarette box (in the glove compartment) and a handgun under the driver’s seat; Moberly was arrested ~45 minutes after the stop.
Moberly moved to suppress the evidence as the product of an unconstitutionally prolonged stop; the trial court denied suppression, the Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Kentucky Supreme Court granted discretionary review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Moberly)	Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth)	Held
Whether Sorrell’s computer/database checks impermissibly prolonged the traffic stop	The officer’s diversion to online searches was unrelated to completing the traffic citation and unlawfully extended the stop	The checks fall within ordinary inquiries incident to a stop (e.g., warrant/record checks) and were part of diligent pursuit of the stop’s mission	The checks did not create reasonable suspicion to justify prolonging the stop; they do not salvage the subsequent detention
Whether calling/waiting for a drug-sniffing canine unlawfully prolonged the stop	Calling and waiting for the dog prolonged the stop for reasons unrelated to the traffic mission and required reasonable suspicion, which did not exist here	Officer had reasonable, articulable suspicion—based on totality (nervousness, sweating, furtive glances, smoking, late hour, no proof of ownership/insurance, and database info)—to detain until the dog arrived	The court held the totality of circumstances did not amount to reasonable suspicion; prolonging the stop for the canine was unconstitutional and evidence seized must be suppressed

Bucalo v. Commonwealth, 422 S.W.3d 253 (Ky. 2013) (traffic stop may violate Fourth Amendment if it unreasonably prolongs beyond purpose or manner unreasonably infringes rights)
Davis v. Commonwealth, 484 S.W.3d 288 (Ky. 2016) (no de minimis exception—any prolongation unrelated to stop’s mission is unreasonable)
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (dog sniff during lawful stop lawful if it does not prolong the stop)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable suspicion standard and requirement of particularized, articulable facts)
United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonable suspicion)
Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796 (1984) (evidence seized following unconstitutional seizure is subject to suppression)
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 37 S.W.3d 745 (Ky. 2001) (probable cause to stop for traffic violation is sufficient regardless of subjective motive)
Strange v. Commonwealth, 269 S.W.3d 847 (Ky. 2008) (presence in high-crime area and evasive behavior alone insufficient for reasonable suspicion)
Adkins v. Commonwealth, 96 S.W.3d 779 (Ky. 2003) (nervousness may be a proper factor in reasonable suspicion analysis)