People v. Heritsch, 98 N.E.3d 420

On Jan. 24, 2014, Officer Zapf stopped Ken Heritsch for crossing the fog line after receiving a vehicle description connected to a possible impaired driver report. A squad-car video recorded the stop.
Zapf checked Heritsch’s license and initially intended to issue a warning; other officers arrived and asked Heritsch to exit the vehicle and searched his person. Heritsch refused consent to a vehicle search.
After a deputy suggested bringing a drug-detection dog, Zapf began preparing a citation (having written only Heritsch’s name on a warning before deciding to cite). Zapf made brief radio calls about a canine unit while continuing to work on the ticket.
Deputy Smyth arrived with Bosco, a drug dog, and conducted a free-air sniff; Bosco alerted and jumped into the vehicle, indicating odor on the ashtray and a lunchbox. Zapf then searched the vehicle and discovered cannabis.
Heritsch was charged with possession of 10–30 grams of cannabis (Class 4 felony due to a prior conviction). He moved to suppress the evidence from the canine/sniff; the trial court denied the motion after a stipulated bench trial and convicted him. The appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged by off-mission activity (requesting consent, radioing for a dog, dog sniff)	Activities did not prolong the stop; Zapf acted at a normal pace and the dog alerted before the citation would have been completed and delivered	Zapf abandoned the stop’s mission, started a citation, sought consent and arranged a canine unit, and thereby prolonged the stop beyond its mission	Affirmed: off-mission activities did not prolong the stop; Bosco’s alert provided probable cause before the citation would have been completed/delivered
Whether a dog sniff during a traffic stop violated the Fourth Amendment by adding time to the stop	Dog sniff lawful if it did not add time beyond mission; here it occurred within the ordinary timeframe of writing the citation	Dog sniff occurred after Zapf diverted from preparing the warning and thus unlawfully prolonged the detention	Court applied Rodriguez: critical question is whether sniff added time; here no unlawful prolongation shown

Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (dog sniff during traffic stop does not inherently violate Fourth Amendment)
Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (officers may not prolong stop beyond mission to conduct unrelated investigation; test is whether the sniff "adds time")
People v. Nicholls, 71 Ill. 2d 166 (statutory authority to assess appeal costs)