State v. Franzen
792 N.W.2d 533
N.D.2010Background
- Franzen was stopped for speeding (82 mph in a 60 mph zone) by a North Dakota patrol officer.
- At stop, a passenger (Zimmerman) appeared nervous; Franzen was smoking and car contained multiple air fresheners and a knitted rearview mirror ornament.
- Franzen and Zimmerman gave differing travel details; dealer-like odor masking indicators suggested possible drug activity.
- Franzen was detained in the patrol vehicle after the speeding citation was issued while the officer questioned Zimmerman and investigated further.
- Franzen admitted to possessing a bag of marijuana and a pipe; a search of the vehicle yielded marijuana and drug paraphernalia.
- Franzen moved to suppress, arguing the continued detention after the initial stop violated the Fourth Amendment; the district court denied the motion; Franzen conditionally pled guilty reserving the right to appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether continued detention after citation was issued was valid | Franzen argues the stop ended with the ticket and no reasonable suspicion for further detention. | Mayer's continued detention was supported by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. | Yes; continued detention supported by reasonable suspicion. |
| Whether totality of circumstances supported reasonable suspicion | Franzen contends no single factor justified suspicion after the stop. | Mayer relied on multiple indicators (odor masking, air fresheners, nervousness, concealment) to infer drug activity. | Yes; totality supported reasonable suspicion. |
| Whether Franzen was seized under the Fourth Amendment after the initial stop | Franzen was not free to leave once in the patrol car and the officer did not tell him he was free to go. | The seizure was a permissible investigative detention during routine post-stop inquiry. | Franzen was seized after the initial stop; the seizure was justified by reasonable suspicion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fields, State v. Fields, 2003 ND 81 (ND 2003) (recognizes masking odor and nervous behavior as factors in reasonable suspicion)
- Guscette, State v. Guscette, 2004 ND 71 (ND 2004) (clarifies seizure analysis post-stop and need for suspicion)
- Jones, United States v. Jones, 269 F.3d 919 (8th Cir. 2001) (permissible extensions of traffic stop activities during detention)
- Whren, Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1996) (probative value of traffic violations for encounter purpose)
- Foley, United States v. Foley, 206 F.3d 802 (8th Cir. 2000) (masking odor as a factor in reasonable suspicion)
- Lopez-Mendoza, United States v. Lopez-Mendoza, 601 F.3d 861 (8th Cir. 2010) (drug-related indicators and nervousness as suspicious conduct)
- Villa-Chaparro, United States v. Villa-Chaparro, 115 F.3d 797 (10th Cir. 1997) (air fresheners and other indicators support reasonable suspicion)
- Ledesma-Dominguez, United States v. Ledesma-Dominguez, 53 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 1995) (absence of ID, nervousness, and masking odor contribute to suspicion)
- Bloomfield, United States v. Bloomfield, 40 F.3d 910 (8th Cir. 1994) (extreme nervousness and masking odor support drug suspicion)