United States v. Richard Lash, III, 665 F. App'x 428

In December 2014, three Gang Impact Unit detectives in an unmarked car followed and stopped Richard Lash III for traffic violations (no headlights, failure to signal).
Lash, a passenger in a rental vehicle he said he’d borrowed, provided a valid license and had no warrants; officers had not issued a citation before further interaction.
Officer Middaugh noticed a small plastic bag near Lash’s leg and asked to see the vehicle’s rental agreement while returning Lash’s documents.
As Lash reached for the rental agreement, Middaugh saw what appeared to be the butt of a gun in the bag; Middaugh ordered Lash out, Lash refused and then accelerated the car, nearly striking officers.
Lash crashed a short distance away, was arrested, and a .38 caliber handgun in a plastic bag was seized; he was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
The district court denied Lash’s motion to suppress and applied a two-level sentencing enhancement for creating a substantial risk of serious bodily injury while fleeing; Lash appealed both rulings.

Issue	Lash's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Legality of continued detention / seizure of firearm after traffic stop	Officers unreasonably extended the stop by asking for the rental-car agreement, so subsequent discovery and seizure were illegal	Requesting rental agreement was a routine, incidental inquiry within the traffic stop’s scope; stop had not ended; officers could order exit for safety	The stop and requests were reasonable; no unlawful extension; suppression denied
Whether officer motivation invalidates search	Middaugh asked for rental agreement to investigate bag and extend stop; subjective motive made request pretextual	Fourth Amendment inquiry is objective; motivation irrelevant if actions objectively within stop’s purpose	Court applied objective test; officer motivation irrelevant; request lawful
Ordering driver out of vehicle	Lash implied ordering exit was improper and extended the stop	Under Mimms, officers may order driver out for safety without suspicion	Ordering Lash out was lawful and did not unreasonably extend the stop
Sentencing enhancement basis	Lash contends district court applied wrong enhancement (obstruction §3C1.1) or erred in enhancement	Record shows court applied §3C1.2 (reckless flight causing substantial risk), which fits facts; Lash did not object at sentencing	Court applied §3C1.2; enhancement appropriate given reckless flight; challenge waived/no plain error

Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (objective nature of Fourth Amendment stop analysis)
Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (traffic-stop duration limited to mission of stop; routine inquiries permitted)
United States v. Everett, 601 F.3d 484 (6th Cir. 2010) (unreasonable manner of execution may invalidate stop)
United States v. Bell, 555 F.3d 535 (6th Cir. 2009) (checking rental agreement is an ordinary inquiry incident to a traffic stop)
Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (officer may order driver out of vehicle for safety)
United States v. Copeland, 321 F.3d 582 (traffic violations justify initial stop)
United States v. Foster, 376 F.3d 577 (record construed in favor of district court’s suppression ruling)
United States v. Bostic, 371 F.3d 865 (failure to object at sentencing limits appellate challenges)
United States v. Vonner, 516 F.3d 382 (plain-error review where sentencing objections not preserved)