Richard Jamal Netherly v. State, 13-14-00374-CR

Richard Jamal Netherly was charged with Felony Possession of a controlled substance in Orange County, Texas (Cause A-130220-R).
Appellant moved to suppress evidence and statements obtained during a November 26, 2011 traffic stop; hearing occurred January 16, 2014, with the court denying suppression after briefing.
Netherly pleaded guilty on April 24, 2014 and the court sentenced him to 20 years’ imprisonment and a $1,000 fine on May 30, 2014 under a plea agreement.
Netherly filed a timely notice of appeal challenging the denial of the suppression motion, asserting a lack of reasonable suspicion or probable cause and detention exceeding the stop’s purpose.
The State’s brief describes the stop as based on a license-plate-light defect and a failure to stop at a stop sign, followed by a canine sniff that led to cocaine discovery in a fanny pack.
The court applies a bifurcated standard of review for suppression rulings, deferring to historical findings and reviewing legal conclusions de novo.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the stop and ensuing detention were reasonable.	Netherly contends there was no reasonable suspicion or probable cause.	State argues there was reasonable suspicion from the stop and continued detention supported by defendant’s conduct.	Detention was reasonable and suppression denied.

Carmouche v. State, 10 S.W.3d 323 (Tex.Crim.App.2000) ( Fourth Amendment reasonableness framework applied to suppression)
Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings; implicit findings upheld)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes reasonable suspicion standard for continued detention)
Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996) (totality of circumstances; reasonableness inquiry must be fact-specific)
United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675 (1985) (no rigid time limit; reasonableness depends on pursued investigative steps)