State v. Barbeau
301 Neb. 293
Neb.2018Background
- On Dec. 11, 2015, Trooper Goltz ran a "ruse checkpoint" operation on I-80; he observed a Lincoln Town Car exit immediately after a sign warning of a checkpoint and followed it.
- Goltz observed no license plates and an in‑transit tag mounted inside a frame that partially obscured top/bottom information; some handwritten numbers appeared in red ink.
- Goltz stopped the vehicle, identified the driver as Ryan Barbeau, and asked for license/registration; Barbeau said he had purchased the car in North Carolina and was driving to Oregon but produced no paperwork.
- Backup arrived, the passenger was found to have an active warrant and was arrested; a drug dog alerted to the trunk and a search produced firearms, controlled substances, and over $39,000.
- Barbeau moved to suppress, arguing lack of probable cause and lack of reasonable suspicion and that the stop should have ended once the tag was readable; the trial court denied suppression, finding probable cause; Barbeau was convicted and appealed.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding the stop qualified as a constitutionally valid investigatory stop supported by reasonable suspicion (rather than deciding probable cause), and that subsequent investigative acts were within the stop’s scope.
Issues
| Issue | Barbeau’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of initial stop — basis | Stop lacked probable cause and reasonable suspicion to detain | Stop was supported by probable cause because in‑transit tag information was not plainly visible | Stop lawful as an investigatory stop supported by reasonable suspicion (court did not decide probable cause) |
| Whether reasonable suspicion can be based on registration appearance | Trooper’s observations were insufficient; couldn’t stop to merely verify compliance | Irregular tag placement, red handwriting, partial obstruction, and evasive exit after checkpoint sign gave particularized suspicion | Totality of circumstances (tag location/appearance, obstruction, exit after checkpoint sign) gave reasonable suspicion to stop |
| Duration/scope of stop — whether officer should have ended stop once tag read | Once officer read “North Carolina” on tag, further detention was unnecessary | Officer reasonably continued routine inquiries incident to investigatory stop (license, registration, computer checks, wait for backup/canine) | Continued brief investigative actions were related to stop’s mission and lawful; stop was not impermissibly prolonged |
| Effect of passenger’s warrant and subsequent search | Evidence discovered after passenger’s arrest/search should be suppressed as fruits of illegitimate seizure | Passenger’s arrest and canine alert occurred after a lawful investigatory stop and lawful scope of investigation | Passenger’s arrest and dog search were lawful fruits of the valid investigatory stop; evidence admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (Fourth Amendment reasonable suspicion framework for stops)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (reasonable‑suspicion can rest on a reasonable mistake of law)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (traffic stop may not be prolonged beyond time to complete mission)
- State v. Childs, 242 Neb. 426 (officer desire merely to verify registration compliance insufficient for reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Bowers, 250 Neb. 151 (absence/irregularity of plates/in‑transit tags can supply reasonable suspicion to investigate)
- State v. Nelson, 282 Neb. 767 (scope of investigatory stop may include routine inquiries and computer checks)