People of Michigan v. Leslie Elijah Malone Jr
329989
| Mich. Ct. App. | Oct 4, 2016Background
- Trooper John Moore stopped Malone for excessively tinted windows and issued a verbal warning after confirming a valid license and no warrants; stop began ~1:43 p.m.
- After a brief initial exchange, Moore returned to his patrol car and detained the two occupants in the stopped vehicle for ~41 minutes while he awaited a K9 unit.
- Moore removed Malone and the passenger, frisked both (finding nothing), requested consent to search the car (both refused), and then ordered a canine "walk-around."
- The K9 alerted during the walk-around; officers searched the vehicle and, after several minutes, found cocaine hidden in the engine air filter.
- Moore relied on factors he said supported prolonging the stop: occupants’ demeanor ("quiet, low in seats"), an officer-safety/LEIN entry suggesting prior narcotics-related history, third-party vehicle ownership, and an alleged masking/fragrance odor — though the record on odor was inconsistent.
- The trial court denied suppression, finding reasonable suspicion; the Court of Appeals (after remand from the Michigan Supreme Court) reversed, holding the extended detention lacked reasonable suspicion and that the later discovery did not cure the illegal seizure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had reasonable suspicion to extend traffic stop for a K9 sniff | Moore’s observations (demeanor, alleged inconsistent story, third‑party car, LEIN "officer safety" entry, and masking odor) were sufficient to create reasonable suspicion to detain for a sniff | Prolonged detention (≈41 minutes) exceeded the stop’s mission; facts were an unparticularized hunch and insufficient to justify seizure | Reversed: no reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop; detention violated Fourth Amendment |
| Whether refusal to consent may justify prolonging a stop | Prosecutor relied on refusal as a trigger to seek a K9 sniff | Malone argued refusal cannot, by itself, justify detention | Held refusal cannot be the basis to prolong a stop; it is legally invalid as the pivotal reason for detention |
| Weight of prior criminal history and LEIN officer-safety entry in reasonable-suspicion calculus | Prior history and LEIN caution supported suspicion of narcotics involvement | Prior convictions or entries alone do not permit warrantless extended detention absent other particularized facts | Held criminal history/LEIN entry, without particularized, articulable indicators of current criminal activity, did not supply reasonable suspicion |
| Legality of canine sniff/entry if vehicle door left open by officer (unresolved) | Prosecutor contended the K9 walk-around was lawful | Malone argued dog’s access (door open) and subsequent search were unlawful | Court did not decide this issue because it reversed on reasonable-suspicion grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015) (traffic stop cannot be prolonged beyond mission absent reasonable suspicion)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable-suspicion standard for investigative stops)
- United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (reasonable suspicion requires more than a hunch; courts must give weight to reasonable inferences from officer experience)
- People v. Williams, 472 Mich. 304 (2005) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonableness during traffic stops and permissible questioning)
- People v. LoCicero (After Remand), 453 Mich. 496 (1996) (officer must articulate how observed behavior, in light of training, supports inference of criminal activity)
- Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (1979) (officers need reasonable suspicion based on objective facts to justify detention)
- People v. Lewis, 251 Mich. App. 58 (2002) (nervous, evasive behavior can be pertinent but must be supported by specific indicia)