State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265

On Aug. 5, 2015, Lincoln police approached a vehicle near a residence connected to a wanted individual; two occupants were in the vehicle and a second vehicle with three occupants was parked in front.
The lead officer approached the second vehicle, saw the front-seat passenger reach under his seat, and requested occupants remain still; additional officers arrived within about a minute.
The wanted person was not in the vehicle, but officers sought identification because the driver was a known narcotics contact and the front-seat passenger was suspected of hiding contraband.
Officers ordered all three occupants to exit the car; the front-seat passenger was arrested on a warrant. After Rogers (rear passenger) exited, an officer saw a purse with a small plastic bag in the rear floorboard.
Consent to search was refused; a drug-detection dog was summoned, alerted on the driver’s side, and officers searched the vehicle and purse, recovering a pipe and a baggie containing residue later linked to Rogers.
Rogers was tried, convicted of possession of a controlled substance, sentenced to 20 months to 5 years, and appealed, arguing suppression error and an excessive sentence.

Issue	Rogers' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the initial encounter became a seizure when occupants were ordered out and whether that seizure was supported by reasonable suspicion	The detention/seizure occurred once the wanted individual was ruled out and thus lacked reasonable suspicion; suppression required	The encounter escalated lawfully from tier-one to tier-two when occupants were ordered out and officers had articulable facts (furtive movement, known narcotics contact, visible bag) supporting reasonable suspicion	Court held the exit order, in context, was a seizure but was supported by reasonable suspicion (furtive reach, driver’s narcotics ties, observed bag); suppression denied
Whether Rogers’ sentence (20 months–5 years) was excessive	Sentence failed to meaningfully consider statutory factors and no specific findings justified a near-maximum term	Sentence fell within statutory limits and the sentencing court exercised permissible discretion in weighing factors	Court held sentence was within statutory limits and not an abuse of discretion

State v. Milos, 294 Neb. 375, 882 N.W.2d 696 (discussing tiers of police-citizen encounters and seizure analysis)
State v. Tyler, 291 Neb. 920, 870 N.W.2d 119 (review standards for suppression rulings)
State v. Loding, 296 Neb. 670, 895 N.W.2d 669 (Fourth Amendment principles on searches and seizures)
State v. Van Ackeren, 242 Neb. 479, 495 N.W.2d 630 (tiered encounter framework)
Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (officer stops and Fourth Amendment limits on seizures)
State v. Hedgcock, 277 Neb. 805, 765 N.W.2d 469 (when a request to exit vehicle becomes a seizure)
State v. Voichahoske, 271 Neb. 64, 709 N.W.2d 659 (furtive movement contributing to reasonable suspicion)
State v. Au, 285 Neb. 797, 829 N.W.2d 695 (definition and level of reasonable suspicion)
State v. Wells, 290 Neb. 186, 859 N.W.2d 316 (totality-of-the-circumstances test for investigative stops)
State v. Draper, 295 Neb. 88, 886 N.W.2d 266 (sentencing discretion principles)