State v. Stands, 956 N.W.2d 366

On November 5, 2019, Officer Heidi Witzel stopped Michael Stands for failing to stop at a stop sign.
Stands exited the vehicle, kept putting his hands in his pockets, gave his name/DOB (no physical ID), and Witzel ran records checks (which later showed no valid driving privileges) and requested a drug dog.
Witzel returned to Stands, asked “Do you have anything on you I should know about right now?” and “Can I search you?” Stands mumbled, nodded/shrugged, and raised his hands.
Witzel searched Stands, found a silver scale with meth residue, a pipe, and cash; Stands admitted recent drug use.
About 35 minutes after the stop, a drug dog arrived and alerted on the vehicle; a vehicle search uncovered methamphetamine.
Stands conditionally pled guilty, appealed the denial of his suppression motion, arguing lack of consent to the person search and unlawful extension of the traffic stop (by the search questions and by waiting for the dog).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Stands)	Held
Whether Stands consented to search of his person	Stands manifested consent by mumbling, nodding, and raising hands	No unequivocal consent; shrugging/mumbling insufficient	Court: Consent shown—mumble + nod + raised hands were an objectively reasonable manifestation of consent
Whether asking to search and searching unlawfully extended the traffic stop	Questions were incidental, occurred before traffic duties completed, and did not measurably prolong the stop	Those questions/search unlawfully prolonged and expanded the stop beyond its traffic purpose	Court: No unlawful extension—questions didn’t measurably lengthen the stop and encounter became consensual once consent given
Whether detaining Stands while awaiting the drug dog unlawfully prolonged the stop	Discovery of scale with meth residue gave reasonable suspicion to detain and await the dog	Waiting for the dog unlawfully prolonged detention absent reasonable suspicion	Court: Lawful—search of person produced reasonable suspicion to continue detention until dog arrived

State v. Hawkins, 898 N.W.2d 446 (standard of review for suppression rulings)
State v. Odom, 722 N.W.2d 370 (consent exception and scope measured by objective understanding)
State v. Mitzel, 685 N.W.2d 120 (consent must be clear and unequivocal)
State v. Vetter, 927 N.W.2d 435 (unrelated inquiries allowed if they do not measurably extend the stop)
Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (traffic stop may not be prolonged beyond mission without reasonable suspicion)
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (dog sniff permissible if it does not prolong stop)
Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (officer inquiries unrelated to stop permissible if they do not extend detention)
United States v. Jones, 269 F.3d 919 (examples of officer duties during traffic stops)
United States v. Peralez, 526 F.3d 1115 (encounter may become consensual and extend for consensual purposes)
State v. Adan, 886 N.W.2d 841 (reasonable-suspicion inquiry uses totality of circumstances)