State v. Marsolek, 964 N.W.2d 730

Deputy Morten stopped a vehicle for an obstructed windshield and an unrestrained backseat passenger; the driver (Larson) and two passengers (including Marsolek) were in the car.
Upon stopping, Deputy Morten observed the driver make a downward movement toward the passenger seat as if concealing something. The deputy requested IDs and ran names by phone because his radio was malfunctioning.
Dispatch told Deputy Morten Larson’s license was suspended and that Larson had prior drug-related convictions; other units were dispatched and troopers arrived.
After a short (about two-minute) conversation with the troopers discussing suspicions that there was something illegal in the car, Deputy Morten asked Larson to exit the vehicle, saw a hypodermic needle in Larson’s pocket, and removed and detained the occupants.
Officers searched the vehicle, found needles, a pipe, and a locked safe under the passenger seat; after Cruz identified the safe as Marsolek’s and Marsolek provided the combination, methamphetamine and needles were discovered.
Marsolek moved to suppress. The district court denied the motion; Marsolek entered a conditional guilty plea and appealed arguing the stop was unlawfully prolonged and lacked reasonable suspicion to expand into a drug investigation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged and converted into a drug investigation without reasonable suspicion	State: officers reasonably expanded the stop because observations supported reasonable suspicion of drug activity	Marsolek: deputy finished traffic-related tasks and should have issued a citation; the subsequent conversation and ordering the driver out unlawfully prolonged the stop and lacked reasonable suspicion	Court held the stop was lawfully prolonged — reasonable suspicion existed to expand the stop into a drug investigation, so suppression was denied

State v. Vetter, 927 N.W.2d 435 (N.D. 2019) (limits on prolonging traffic stops; stop’s mission concept)
Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (de minimis extensions of traffic stops are not permitted absent reasonable suspicion)
Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249 (2007) (passengers are seized during a traffic stop and may challenge its legality)
State v. Franzen, 792 N.W.2d 533 (N.D. 2010) (furtive movements by passengers can contribute to reasonable suspicion to investigate drug activity)
State v. Wills, 930 N.W.2d 77 (N.D. 2019) (route deviations may contribute to suspicion but require context)
State v. Deviley, 803 N.W.2d 561 (N.D. 2011) (sufficiency of evidence to establish reasonable suspicion under totality of circumstances)