Moore v. State
2011 ND 179
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Lee was stopped for speeding on I-94; Deviley sat in the front passenger seat.
- An officer questioned Lee about travel plans; he observed nervous behavior and inconsistencies in stories.
- The officer noted an open energy drink and minimal luggage, and that Lee’s statements differed from Deviley’s.
- After Lee was issued a speeding warning and told to wait, the officer summoned a canine unit; a delay occurred before the dog arrived.
- A canine search revealed 95 pounds of marijuana; both men were charged with possession with intent to deliver and moved to suppress evidence.
- Deviley and Lee pled guilty conditionally, reserving the right to appeal the suppression denial; Lee also appealed the charge–reduction decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there reasonable suspicion to detain after the traffic stop? | Deviley/Lee rely on lack of suspicion after stop to suppress. | Lee/Deviley argue no reasonable suspicion existed to extend the stop. | There was reasonable suspicion to detain. |
| Did the canine-arrival delay create a de facto arrest? | Delay was permissible under suspicion-driven detention. | Delay transformed into an arrest requiring probable cause. | No de facto arrest; delays did not violate the Fourth Amendment. |
| Was Lee properly charged with an enhanced offense given conflicting statutes? | Lee contends the statutes conflict and should not both apply. | Lee argues one hundred pounds threshold governs enhancement and avoids Class A. | Enhancement applied under 19-03.1-23.1(1)(c)(11); Lee’s charge appropriately elevated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (U.S. Supreme Court 1996) (detentions during traffic stops permissible for objective purpose)
- Franzen, 2010 ND 244 (N.D. 2010) (totality-of-the-circumstances reasonable-suspicion standard; deference to officer inferences)
- Fields, 2003 ND 81 (N.D. 2003) (reasonableness of waiting for canine; nervousness alone insufficient)
- Ovind, 1998 ND 69 (N.D. 1998) (consideration of totality of circumstances in reasonable suspicion)
- Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. Supreme Court 1980) (defining seizure for Fourth Amendment purposes)
- Fields, 662 N.W.2d 242 (N.D. 2003) (nervousness as a factor but not alone; context matters)
- Zimmerman v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 543 N.W.2d 479 (N.D. 1996) (officer’s factual deductions must be supported by findings)
- State v. Franzen, 2010 ND 244 (N.D. 2010) (extensive factors summarize reasonable suspicion in drug cases)