State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265

On Aug. 5, 2015, Lincoln police approached a parked vehicle near a car associated with a wanted individual; the vehicle contained a driver, a front-seat passenger, and Latriesha Rogers in the rear seat.
The lead officer saw the front-seat passenger reach under his seat, suspected a weapon/contraband, and called for backup; three additional officers arrived.
The occupants were directed to exit the vehicle; the front-seat passenger was arrested on a warrant.
The lead officer observed a small plastic bag protruding from a purse on the rear floorboard (later connected to Rogers) and requested consent to search the vehicle, which was refused.
A drug-detection dog sniff alerted on the driver’s side; officers then searched the vehicle, found a pipe and the bag with residue, tied the purse/pipe to Rogers, and charged her with possession.
Rogers’ pretrial motion to suppress was denied; she was convicted at trial and sentenced to 20 months to 5 years. She appealed the denial of suppression and alleged an excessive sentence.

Issue	Rogers' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the encounter was a seizure triggering Fourth Amendment protection when passengers were ordered out of the vehicle	The initial encounter became a seizure after the wanted person was not found and passengers were detained; thus suppression required	Ordering occupants out amid multiple officers and an arrest was lawful and did not exceed a tier-one encounter absent reasonable suspicion	Ordering passengers out was a seizure (escalation to tier-two); court treated it as such
Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to detain and investigate (dog sniff) after wanting person was not present	Detention rested on an impermissible hunch based on the driver’s associations and prior investigations	Observed furtive movement under the seat, the driver’s known narcotics contacts, assisting officers’ intelligence, and the visible bag in the purse together supplied reasonable suspicion	Combined facts—furtive movement, driver’s known narcotics contact/intel, and visible bag—gave reasonable suspicion; detention and dog sniff lawful; subsequent search valid
Whether sentence (20 months–5 years) was excessive	Court failed to meaningfully consider statutory sentencing factors and should have made factual findings	Sentence was within statutory limits and court considered appropriate factors; no abuse of discretion	Sentence within statutory limits; no abuse of discretion; not excessive

State v. Milos, 294 Neb. 375 (Neb. 2016) (explains tiered police-citizen encounters and review standards for suppression rulings)
State v. Tyler, 291 Neb. 920 (Neb. 2015) (framework for determining when seizure occurred and assessing reasonable suspicion)
State v. Loding, 296 Neb. 670 (Neb. 2017) (review of suppression and sentence issues)
State v. Van Ackeren, 242 Neb. 479 (Neb. 1994) (discusses tier-one encounters and voluntary cooperation)
State v. Hedgcock, 277 Neb. 805 (Neb. 2009) (officer request to exit vehicle may be a seizure depending on totality of circumstances)
State v. Voichahoske, 271 Neb. 64 (Neb. 2006) (observed furtive movements under seat can contribute to reasonable suspicion)
Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1979) (constitutional limits on vehicle stops and seizures)
State v. Draper, 295 Neb. 88 (Neb. 2016) (discusses appellate review of sentencing discretion)