State v. Heien, 226 N.C. App. 280

Defendant Heien pled guilty in 2010 to attempted cocaine trafficking in Surry County; he preserved suppression issues on appeal.
Initial trial court found Level I prior record and imposed concurrent sentences of 10–12 months on each count.
This Court reversed on Heien I, holding the traffic stop was not based on reasonable suspicion; Supreme Court reversed and remanded for remaining issues.
Traffic stop originated with Sergeant Darisse for a non-functioning brake light; post-stop, questions and search followed.
Supreme Court affirmed that the stop was objectively reasonable despite Darisse’s mistaken understanding of brake-light law.
On remand, the trial court rulings addressed whether the stop was unduly prolonged, whether consent to search was voluntary, and the scope of any search.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the stop unduly prolonged beyond its original purpose?	State argues the detainment was permissible and instrumentally short.	Heien contends the delay exceeded the brake-light stop’s scope and violated rights.	Stop not unduly prolonged; valid temporary detention.
Was defendant's consent to search voluntary under the circumstances?	State contends consent was voluntary given the return of documents and noncoercive conduct.	Heien asserts consent was elicited during an unlawful seizure and was not voluntary.	Consent was voluntary; encounter deemed consensual between stop's conclusion and search.
Was the scope of the search permissible without explicit notice of narcotics objective?	State maintains officers could search for weapons, cash, or contraband; no explicit object-notification required.	Heien argues lack of notice on narcotics scope undermines validity.	Search proper; objective implicit; probable cause arose, extending the search.

State v. Arrington, 311 N.C. 633 (1984) (limits of search and seizure under NC Constitution)
Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) (roadside detention when stop is permissible)
Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984) (roadside questioning during traffic stop not requiring Miranda warnings)
State v. Falana, 129 N.C. App. 813 (1998) (needs for reasonable and articulable suspicion during stop)
State v. Kincaid, 147 N.C. App. 94 (2001) (consent to search after return of documents permissible)
State v. Brooks, 337 N.C. 132 (1994) (freedom to leave or refuse after non-coercive questioning)
Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996) (no requirement to inform of right to refuse after license return)
Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (reasonable suspicion is a commonsense, nontechnical standard)
Jackson v. State, 199 N.C. App. 236 (2009) (passenger seizure analysis following extended stop)
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (passenger seized during traffic stop)