954 F.3d 919
6th Cir.2020Background:
- Trooper King observed Garrett Lott driving in the left lane on I-75 and stopped him for a Kentucky left‑lane infraction.
- King, an interdiction-team trooper, saw Lott "coast" and drive with arms straight, which King interpreted as nervousness; King followed and initiated the stop.
- At the roadside King ran Lott’s information in a mobile-data-terminal (MDT) warrant check, asked Lott to exit the vehicle, and enlisted Trooper Reams with a K‑9 after Lott refused consent to search.
- Lott admitted he had "a little bit of marijuana" in the console; the K‑9 alerted on the vehicle, and a subsequent search uncovered marijuana in the console and heroin and other drugs in the trunk.
- Lott moved to suppress, arguing the stop was pretextual and was unlawfully extended before his marijuana admission; the district court denied suppression, Lott pleaded guilty conditionally, and he appealed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of the initial traffic stop | Lott: stop was pretextual and therefore unconstitutional | Gov: officer observed a traffic violation (left‑lane infraction); probable cause existed and subjective intent is irrelevant | Stop valid — officer had probable cause; pretext irrelevant (affirmed) |
| Whether the stop was impermissibly extended before marijuana admission/K‑9 sniff | Lott: tasks incident to the stop were complete; a gap before admission shows an unlawful extension, so later evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree | Gov: MDT warrant check remained part of the stop’s mission; admission occurred while stop was still ongoing, so extension was lawful | No unlawful extension — court found admission occurred within permissible duration; suppression denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (traffic‑stop "mission" limits permissible duration; dog sniff cannot extend stop absent independent reasonable suspicion)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (officer's subjective intent irrelevant if traffic violation provides probable cause)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (dog sniffs during lawful traffic stops are permissible if they do not prolong the stop)
- United States v. Davis, 430 F.3d 345 (6th Cir. 2005) (observed traffic violation supplies probable cause for stop)
- United States v. Pacheco, 841 F.3d 384 (6th Cir. 2016) (nervousness alone insufficient to create reasonable suspicion to prolong a stop)
- United States v. Stepp, 680 F.3d 651 (6th Cir. 2012) (seizure may be extended if intervening reasonable suspicion arises; assess totality of circumstances)