State v. Bullock
370 N.C. 256
| N.C. | 2017Background
- Officer McDonough stopped Michael Bullock on I-85 for speeding, following too closely, and briefly crossing the white shoulder line; Bullock was driving a rental car and was the sole occupant.
- During the stop Bullock’s hands trembled, he had two cell phones, and gave inconsistent answers about his destination and girlfriend; a brief frisk revealed $372 in cash.
- Officer McDonough ran three database checks (local, statewide, national) while speaking with Bullock, then asked to search the car; Bullock consented to a car search but refused consent to search specific personal items (a bag and two hoodies).
- A second officer arrived, the trunk was opened, Bullock objected and said the bag was not his; a police dog was used, alerted to the bag, and a large quantity of heroin was found inside.
- The superior court denied Bullock’s motion to suppress; the Court of Appeals reversed, holding the stop was unlawfully prolonged under Rodriguez; the State appealed to the North Carolina Supreme Court, which reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged under Rodriguez | State: Officer’s inquiries and safety measures were part of the stop’s mission; background database checks and a brief frisk did not measurably extend the stop | Bullock: The stop was extended beyond the time needed to complete the traffic-stop mission, so subsequent dog sniff/search required reasonable suspicion that did not exist | Court: Stop was not unlawfully prolonged; frisk and database checks fell within the stop’s mission and lasted negligibly; reasonable suspicion arose by the time checks completed, justifying extension for dog sniff |
| Whether officer’s frisk and ordering driver out of vehicle unlawfully extended the stop | State: Ordering out and frisk were safety measures incidental to the stop’s mission | Bullock: These actions unconstitutionally prolonged/seized him beyond mission scope | Court: Ordering driver out and an 8–9 second frisk were justified by officer safety and did not measurably extend the stop |
| Whether running database checks during the stop unlawfully prolonged the detention | State: Checks ran in background and are part of ordinary inquiries (license, warrants, registration, criminal history) | Bullock: Running checks prolonged the detention beyond mission time | Court: Running checks while conversing was permissible; time for checks fell within mission unless they measurably extended duration |
| Whether reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop existed before dog sniff | State: Totality of circumstances (driving, rental car, two phones, nervousness, inconsistent statements, cash, database results) gave reasonable suspicion of drug courier activity | Bullock: No reasonable suspicion had formed before the sniff | Court: Reasonable suspicion arose by the time checks completed and conversation revealed contradictions, permitting extension for dog sniff |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (traffic-stop duration limited to mission of stop; extensions require reasonable suspicion)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (traffic-stop mission includes ordinary inquiries incident to stop)
- Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997) (officer may order driver out of vehicle during lawful stop for safety)
- Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) (ordering driver out of vehicle permissible incident to stop)
- Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) (traffic stop is a seizure under Fourth Amendment)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable suspicion standard requires specific, articulable facts)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (reasonable suspicion is less demanding than probable cause)
- United States v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981) (reasonable-suspicion assessment uses totality of the circumstances)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (safety-related precautions during traffic stops may be reasonable)
- United States v. Holt, 264 F.3d 1215 (10th Cir. 2001) (simultaneous checks of criminal history, license, and registration reasonable for officer safety)