State v. Sosa
427 P.3d 448
Utah Ct. App.2018Background
- Sgt. initiated a lawful traffic stop after observing an improper right turn; Linda Sosa was a passenger and recognized from a prior arrest.
- About three minutes into the stop, Sgt. began running the driver’s information and requested a police K-9; the K-9 unit arrived roughly five minutes later (about eight minutes after the stop began).
- While Sgt. was still completing the records check, the K-9 conducted an exterior sniff (~30 seconds) and alerted; subsequent interior sniff and search revealed cocaine, methamphetamine, and hydrocodone.
- Sosa was charged with multiple controlled-substance counts; she moved to suppress evidence under the Fourth Amendment and the Utah Constitution; the district court denied suppression.
- Sosa entered a Sery plea reserving the right to appeal the denial of suppression; on appeal she argued the traffic stop was impermissibly extended to allow the dog sniff without reasonable suspicion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Sosa) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether requesting and conducting a dog sniff during a traffic stop unreasonably extended the stop without reasonable suspicion | Sgt. impermissibly diverted attention and prolonged the stop to conduct an unrelated dog sniff, violating the Fourth Amendment | The dog sniff occurred while the occupants were lawfully seized and did not measurably delay the stop; the sniff produced independent reasonable suspicion when the dog alerted | Affirmed: no Fourth Amendment violation where sniff occurred during ongoing stop, no evidence the request caused any measurable delay, and the dog alert produced independent reasonable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sery, 758 P.2d 935 (Utah Ct. App. 1988) (describes Sery plea procedure permitting guilty plea while preserving right to appeal denial of suppression)
- State v. Peña, 869 P.2d 932 (Utah 1994) (noting subsequent treatment of Sery on other grounds)
- State v. Paredez, 409 P.3d 125 (Utah Ct. App. 2017) (standard of review for suppression denials: mixed question of law and fact)
- State v. Baker, 229 P.3d 650 (Utah 2010) (traffic-stop mission ends when investigation of violation is complete; cannot detain to conduct dog sniff absent reasonable suspicion)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (U.S. 2015) (officers may not prolong a traffic stop, absent reasonable suspicion, to conduct a dog sniff)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (questions unrelated to traffic stop are permissible if they do not measurably extend the stop)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (a dog sniff during a lawful traffic stop that does not prolong the stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment)