State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265

Background

On Aug. 5, 2015, Lincoln police approached a parked vehicle near a target car linked to a wanted person; three occupants were in the approached vehicle and a second vehicle with three occupants sat nearby.
The lead officer saw the front-seat passenger reach under his seat, ordered occupants to exit, and ultimately arrested the front-seat passenger on a warrant.
The lead officer recognized the driver as a narcotics contact and, after passengers exited, observed a purse in the rear with a small plastic bag consistent with narcotics packaging.
Officers requested consent to search the vehicle (denied), called a drug-detection dog, and the dog alerted on the driver’s side; a subsequent search produced a pipe and residue in the purse, later identified as Rogers’ property.
Rogers (rear-seat passenger) was charged with possession of a controlled substance; she moved to suppress the stop/search and was denied; a jury convicted her and she was sentenced to 20 months to 5 years.

Issues

Issue	Rogers' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the encounter became a seizure when occupants were ordered out of the car	The initial encounter became a seizure once the wanted person was ruled out and passengers were detained; thus Fourth Amendment protection applied	Ordering occupants out amid multiple officers, arrest of another occupant, and surrounding show of authority constituted a lawful escalation if supported by reasonable suspicion	Court: Ordering passengers to exit under those circumstances was a seizure (tier-two); therefore reasonable suspicion was required and must be assessed
Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to detain and sniff/search the vehicle	The detention lacked more than a hunch—officer’s mere knowledge the driver associated with narcotics investigations was insufficient	Combined facts (furtive reaching under seat, driver known narcotics contact, assistance-provided intelligence, observed baggie in purse) created reasonable suspicion; dog sniff and dog alert gave probable cause for search	Court: Under the totality of circumstances, officers had reasonable suspicion to detain and later probable cause to search after dog alert; suppression denied
Whether evidence from the search should have been suppressed	Evidence was the fruit of an unlawful seizure/search and should be excluded	Evidence was lawfully obtained after a permissible detention and canine alert-supported search	Court: Evidence admissible; conviction stands
Whether the sentence (20 months–5 years) was excessive	Sentencing court failed to meaningfully consider statutory factors and justify severity	Sentence within statutory limits; court is accorded wide discretion and no showing of failure to consider factors	Court: No abuse of discretion; sentence affirmed

Key Cases Cited

State v. Milos, 294 Neb. 375 (discussing tiered police-citizen encounters and review standard for suppression)
State v. Tyler, 291 Neb. 920 (standards for determining when a seizure occurs)
State v. Loding, 296 Neb. 670 (review of suppression and reasonable-suspicion principles)
State v. Van Ackeren, 242 Neb. 479 (tier-one encounter discussion)
State v. Hedgcock, 277 Neb. 805 (when request to exit vehicle constitutes a seizure)
State v. Voichahoske, 271 Neb. 64 (furtive movement under seat contributes to reasonable suspicion)
State v. Au, 285 Neb. 797 (definition of reasonable suspicion)
State v. Wells, 290 Neb. 186 (totality-of-circumstances test for investigative stops)
Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (officer stops and Fourth Amendment limits)
State v. Draper, 295 Neb. 88 (sentencing discretion and review)
State v. Custer, 292 Neb. 88 (sentencing factors and judicial discretion)