People v. Pulido, 2017 IL App (3d) 150215 (August). Episode 403 (Duration 9:59)

After a traffic stop the car is towed to the police station so it could be searched more thoroughly.

Gist

It turns out the defendant was under investigation by a narcotics unit and they had tipped of the trooper to defendant’s car.

Six days before the traffic stop defendant gave some meth to an undercover. They set up a bigger deal. Rather than go through with the deal investigators decided to tip off state troopers to the car.

All they told the trooper was that the car had drugs in it.

Didn’t tell him what kind of drugs or where they were kept.

Stopped

The the evidence showed that defendant was properly stopped for speeding.

K-9 unit arrived at the scene while the stop was ongoing, and Rico alerted to narcotics.

The trial court noted that Rico’s certification had expired, but found that went to the weight of the evidence. The court also found that defendant consented to a search of his vehicle. No drugs were found during the first search and the vehicle was moved due to rain and safety issues.

Eventually, at the police station investigators found tubes wrapped with black tape from the vehicle’s air filter. Inside the tubes was a substance that later tested positive for methamphetamines.

Sentence

Ultimately, the court found defendant guilty, and sentenced defendant to 15 years’ imprisonment.

Issue

Was seizing and towing the car outside the scope the police’s constitutional authority?

Terry Stop

A traffic stop is analogous to a Terry investigatory stop, and therefore, the reasonableness of police conduct during a traffic stop may be judged by reference to Terry’s dual inquiry.

The two prongs of this inquiry are

(1) whether the stop was justified at its inception and

(2) whether the officer’s actions during the course of the stop were reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that initially justified the stop.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 19-20 (1968).

No Problem With The Speeding

Here, the trooper testified that he had tested and verified that his LIDAR device was working properly at the start of his shift. The LIDAR device showed defendant was traveling seven miles per hour above the posted speed limit. Defendant, therefore, violated section 11- 601(b) of the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-601(b)).

The decision to stop defendant’s vehicle was lawful at its inception.

No Problem With The Drug Dog

After obtaining defendant’s information, the trooper and defendant returned to the squad car so that he could run the information through LEADS and write defendant a warning.

Before the trooper finished writing defendant a warning and receiving the confirmation from LEADS, the K-9 unit arrived on the scene and conducted the free-air sniff. After Rico alerted on the vehicle, the trooper was informed by radio that defendant’s LEADS check was clear. A free-air sniff conducted during a lawful traffic stop does not violate the fourth amendment, as long as it is done, as it was here, within the time reasonably required to complete the mission of the initial traffic stop.

Having found that the free-air sniff did not unreasonably prolong the traffic stop, we now consider whether Rico’s alert constituted probable cause to search defendant’s vehicle.

Did Dog’s Alert Provide Additional Authority?

Although we find that Rico’s positive alert provided the officers with probable cause to search defendant’s vehicle on I-80, we find that such probable cause dissipated after the officers’ initia...