USSC Holds during Traffic Stops Police can’t detain suspects to wait for K-9 drug sniffing dog.
Search and Seizure, K-9, Dog sniffing, unreasonable searches and seizures. 4th amendment rubber meets the road
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Tuesday April 21, 2015 that the Constitution forbids police from holding a suspect without probable cause, even for fewer than 10 extra minutes.
Writing on behalf of the court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg declared that the constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure prevent police from extending an otherwise completed traffic stop to allow for a drug-sniffing dog to arrive.
“We hold that a police stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.”
The Rodriguez case is important in the ongoing line being drawn between citizens living in a democracy based upon freedom and the governments interest of protecting the safety and well being of the public. All too often we get calls involving police encounters during a traffic stop. Traffic stops in certain situations can and will lead to searches of vehicles,
depending on many factors. Prior to the Rodriguez case, the bright line rule had been that the traffic stop may extend only as long as it was necessary for the reason for the traffic stop to be completed ( writing a ticket, giving a warning etc..). The purpose of a traffic stop is not and should never be to investigate a person unless there is some suspicion of a crime afoot. Sometime in traffic situation, and because drivers are unaware of their legal obligation during a traffic stop, often times the police can and will take advantage of these
situations, detain the driver longer than they need to be detain, and utilize that time to try to find probable cause of some crime.
Rodriguez v the United States puts an end to that type of police work. After the traffic stop had been complete with Rodriguez, the Nebraska Trooper asked if he could walk his drug sniffing, k-9 around the vehicle. To his credit, Rodriguez stated no, the trooper nonetheless searched the exterior of the vehicle for 7-8 minutes while awaiting back up to arrive. Adter the k-9 allegedly hit on the vehicle, a search of the vehicle revealed large quantities of methamphetamine, and Rodriguez was arrested and charged.
It is important to note that the entirety of the traffic stop lasted less than 30 minutes.
In suppressing all the evidence (the methamphetamine) that was a result of the traffic stop and search of the vehicle, the United States Supreme Court found that search of Rodriguez’s car was illegal, and the evidence gathered in it should not be used at trial.
While officers may use a dog to sniff around a car during the course of a routine traffic stop, they cannot extend the length of the stop in order to carry it out.
“[T]he tolerable duration of police inquiries in the traffic-stop context is determined by the seizure’s ‘mission’ — to address the traffic violation that warranted the stop,” Ginsburg ruled. “Authority for the seizure thus ends when tasks tied to the traffic infraction are — or reasonably should have been — completed.”
In its dissenting opinion Justices Clarence Thomas (writing for the dissent), Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy disagreed with the ruling, taunting the majority opinion by stating “Had Officer Struble arrested, handcuffed, and taken Rodriguez to the police station for his traffic violation, he would have complied with the Fourth Amendment. “But because he made Rodriguez wait for seven or eight extra minutes until a dog arrived, he evidently committed a constitutional violation. Such a view of the Fourth Amendment makes little sense.” Justice Thomas argued the majorities ruling makes meaningless the legal difference between “reasonable suspicion”- which does not authorize a search of someone’s property and “probable cause” which does and arguing that police can reasonably detain people to investigate other possible violations of the law. 13-9972_p8k0
As always, there is so much important material to highlight and share with those who are interested in all of our favorite topics: medical cannabis, cannabis reform, United States citizens’ constitutional protections, the art of lawyering and trial practice, and industrial hemp research and development. The month of April 2015 was exciting and we hope you enjoy some of the highlights.
The 44th Annual Hash Bash of 2015
The first Saturday of April in Ann Arbor is always reserved for Hash Bash. More than 8,000 people showed up for this year’s event. In what has truly turned into a political and freedom rally, this year was no different and the guests and speakers exemplified this spirit. Friend and fellow Cannabis Reform activist Jim Powers and his young son Ryan, a cannabis patient, were the lead off speakers, setting a tone that this was not your momma’s hash bash. Amongst the diversity of speakers were several patients…each telling their miracle stories of how cannabis improved their medical conditions; one even stating it cured their cancer. Political Leaders were in abundance as well. Friend and one of the few politicians anyone can say that they like, Jeff Irwin of Michigan’s House of Representatives was there. In addition, Ann Arbor’s Mayor Sabra Briere, Lansing’s Mayor Virg Bernero, Comedian/Actor/Activist Tommy Chong, and John Sinclair spoke at the event.
Many People probably don’t understand the history and significance of Hash Bash. Hash Bash is an annual event held in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on the first Saturday of April…at high noon on the University of Michigan’s Diag. A collection of speeches, live music, street vending and occasional civil disobedience are centered on the goal of reforming federal, state, and local marijuana laws. The first Hash Bash was held on Saturday, April 1, 1972 in response to the March 9th, 1972 decision by the Michigan Supreme Court declaring the law it used to convict cultural activist John Sinclair for possession of two marijuana joints unconstitutional. This action left the State of Michigan without a law prohibiting the use of marijuana until after the weekend of April 1, 1972.
The John Sinclair case, albeit a 1972 opinion, is still good law in Michigan and one would think would be a good case to rely upon to truly reform the current hypocritical and arcane crimes for the growth, use and possession of marihuana. In the meantime Komorn Law cited and relied upon this case often in our amicus curiae brief we filed before the Michigan Supreme Court in the matters currently pending; People v. Tutttle and People v. Hartwick arguing amongst other things that Marijuana is not and cannot be a schedule 1 controlled substance under Michigan law.
An audio recording of oral arguments before Michigan Supreme Court concerning “People vs. John Sinclair” can be found here People v. Sinclair, 379 Mich. 91 (1972)
Here are some of the compelling findings in that case:
The Michigan Supreme Court has made findings of fact that are relevant here. “It cannot be doubted that the judiciary has the power to determine the true state of facts upon which a (in this case marijuana) law is based.” People v. Sinclair, 379 Mich. 91 (1972) citing Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S.Ct. 686, 98 L.Ed. 873 (1954). The Michigan Supreme Court in Sinclair addressed the issue of the rationality of the State’s marijuana laws and held:
Comparison of the effects of marijuana use on both the individual and society with the effects of other drug use demonstrates not only that there is no rational basis for classifying marijuana with the ‘hard narcotics’, but, also, that there is not even a rational basis for treating marijuana as a more dangerous drug than alcohol.” Sinclair, 379 Mich. at 103. “No physical dependency is produced by use of the drug and, hence, there are no withdrawal symptoms or ‘abstinence syndrome’ when the drug is unavailable to the user. No lethal dose for marijuana has been established… the evidence available concerning marijuana’s effect on psychomotor functions seems to show very little impairment, at least in experienced users. Id. At 107.
There is no reliable scientific evidence demonstrating that chronic psychosis can be caused by marijuana use in dramatic contrast to the American experience with alcohol. The argument that marijuana use causes or contributes to assaultive crime is now largely discredited. Again by contrast, considerable evidence points to a substantial connection between alcohol use and commission of violent crimes. Finally, the ‘stepping stone argument’ that marijuana use leads to use of ‘hard narcotics’ has no scientific basis. Id at 110. (internal citations omitted).
The Michigan Supreme Court went on to hold: “The murky atmosphere of ignorance and misinformation which casts its pall over the State and Federal legislatures’ original classification of marijuana with the hard narcotics has been well documented… We can no longer allow the residuals of that early misinformation to continue choking off a rational evaluation of marijuana… The truth compels us to conclude at the minimum that marijuana has been erroneously classified with the opiates….” Id at 114-15 (emphasis added). Or as a concurring Justice noted, “Possession of a natural growing plant can hardly be malum in se (evil in and of itself). Id at 152. The court reversed Sinclair’s conviction as violative of equal protection because of the irrational classification of marijuana and the cruel and unusual nature of the excessive punishment.
Marijuana is not and cannot be a schedule 1 controlled substance under Michigan law. Thank you John Sinclair.
Another stand out from Hash Bash 2015 was Lansing’s Mayor Virg Benero, who took to the podium and led the crowd in a new version of “Free the Weed.” While standing before what would normally be an unfriendly Ann Arbor crowd, the Lansing Mayor let it be known that he has had a revelation. As he stated to the crowd “I realize now that war on marihuana is a war on people. I realize now that when this crowd chants, “free the weed,” what you are really saying is free the people. So then….will you join me-when I say free the weed, you say free the People.”
Lansing Mayor Virg Benero – Taking a stand on Sanity – Hash Bash 2015
Attorney Michael Komorn – Speaks Out – Hash Bash 2015
Although I didn’t get a chance to get through my entire speech, I have posted a link here to the written version of my Hash Bash 2015 Komorn rant. Also it can be heard here in the PGT rant episode 244
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Tuesday April 21, 2015 that the Constitution forbids police from holding a suspect without probable cause, even for fewer than 10 extra minutes.
Writing on behalf of the court, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg declared that the constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure prevent police from extending an otherwise completed traffic stop to allow for a drug-sniffing dog to arrive.
“We hold that a police stop exceeding the time needed to handle the matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.”
The Rodriguez cases is important in the ongoing line being drawn between citizens living in a democracy based upon freedom and the governments interest of protecting the safety and wellbeing of the public. All too often we get calls involving police encounters during a traffic stop. Traffic stops in certain situations can and will lead to searches of vehicles, depending on many factors. Prior to the Rodriguez case, the bright line rule had been that the traffic stop may extend only as long as it was necessary for the reason for the traffic stop to be completed ( writing a ticket, giving a warning etc..). The purpose of a traffic stop is not and should never be to investigate a person unless there is some suspicion of a crime afoot. Sometime in traffic situation, and because drivers are unaware of their legal obligation during a traffic stop, often times the police can and will take advantage of these situations, detain the driver longer than they need to be detain, and utilize that time to try to find probable cause of some crime.
Rodriguez v the United States puts an end to that type of police work. After the traffic stop had been complete with Rodriguez, the Nebraska Trooper asked if he could walk his drug sniffing, k-9 around the vehicle. To his credit, Rodriguez stated no, the trooper nonetheless searched the exterior of the vehicle for 7-8 minutes while awaiting back up to arrive. After the k-9 allegedly hit on the vehicle, a search of the vehicle revealed large quantities of methamphetamine, and Rodriguez was arrested and charged. It is important to note that the entirety of the traffic stop lasted less than 30 minutes.
In suppressing all the evidence (the methamphetamine) that was a result of the traffic stop and search of the vehicle, the United States Supreme Court found that search of Rodriguez’s car was illegal, and the evidence gathered in it should not be used at trial. While officers may use a dog to sniff around a car during the course of a routine traffic stop, they cannot extend the length of the stop in order to carry it out.
“[T]he tolerable duration of police inquiries in the traffic-stop context is determined by the seizure’s ‘mission’ — to address the traffic violation that warranted the stop,” Ginsburg ruled. “Authority for the seizure thus ends when tasks tied to the traffic infraction are — or reasonably should have been — completed.”
In its dissenting opinion Justices Clarence Thomas (writing for the dissent), Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy disagreed with the ruling, taunting the majority opinion by stating “Had Officer Struble arrested, handcuffed, and taken Rodriguez to the police station for his traffic violation, he would have complied with the Fourth Amendment.“But because he made Rodriguez wait for seven or eight extra minutes until a dog arrived, he evidently committed a constitutional violation. Such a view of the Fourth Amendment makes little sense.”Justice Thomas argued the majorities ruling makes meaningless the legal difference between “reasonable suspicion”- which does not authorize a search of someone’s property and “probable cause” which does and arguing that police can reasonably detain people to investigate other possible violations of the law.
According to articles posted by Reuters, CBS and Newsweek. Prescription painkiller deaths have fallen in States that have medical marijuana acts.
“NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Researchers aren’t sure why, but in the 23 U.S. states where medical marijuana has been legalized, deaths from opioid overdoses have decreased by almost 25 percent, according to a new analysis.”
“In states with a medical marijuana law, overdose deaths from opioids like morphine, oxycodone and heroin decreased by an average of 20 percent after one year, 25 percent by two years and up to 33 percent by years five and six compared to what would have been expected, according to results in JAMA Internal Medicine.”
“Meanwhile, opioid overdose deaths across the country increased dramatically, from 4,030 in 1999 to 16,651 in 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Three of every four of those deaths involved prescription pain medications.”
Of those who die from prescription opioid overdoses, 60 percent have a legitimate prescription from a single doctor, the CDC also reports.”
Indian tribes are smelling the sweet skunky odor of another potential moneymaking venture in the marijuana business. The first Tribal Marijuana Conference is set on the Tulalip Indian Reservation in Washington state.
Delegates from more than 50 tribes in at least 20 states have registered. According to the website general admission ticket prices went for $595.00 plus a $9.95 fee. The get-together came after the Obama administration announced last year that it would not interfere with any federally recognized tribes that want to grow and sell pot on reservation lands .
One analyst warned that any tribe expecting to hit the jackpot might be in for a surprise, particularly as the supply of legal pot in the U.S. increases.
“People keep forgetting it’s a competitive market,” said Mark Kleiman, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, who served as Washington state’s top pot consultant. “And it’s cheap to grow.”
“In Washington state, where retail pot stores opened in July, Kleiman said pot growers who sold their product for $21 a gram only a few months ago are now getting $4 a gram.”
There are some declassified Oval Office tapes from 1971-1972 that reveal the foundation of marijuana criminalization is misinformation, culture war and prejudice.
The Shafer Commission was appointed by President Nixon and conducted one of the most comprehensive examination and assessment of marijuana performed by the US government. The Oval Office tapes highlight the discrepancy between Nixon’s personal agenda and the commission’s recommendations.
Here are a few excerpts from a CSDP.org research report.
“The most important recommendation of the Commission was the decriminalization of possession and non-profit transfer of marijuana. Decriminalization meant there should be no punishment – criminal or civil – under state or federal law. The day before the Commission released its report President Nixon told Bob Haldeman: “We need, and I use the word ‘all out war,’ or all fronts . . . have to attack on all fronts.” The conversation went on to plan a speech about why Nixon opposed marijuana legalization and doing “a drug thing every week” during the 1972 presidential election year.”
“One year after Nixon’s “all out war” marijuana arrests jumped over 100,000 to 420,700 people. Since the Commission recommended marijuana offenses not be a crime nearly 15 million people have been arrested.”
“The impact of the marijuana laws has grown. In fact in recent years the FBI has reported a record number of marijuana arrests – last year 734,497 were arrested for marijuana, 80 percent for possession. From 1972-2000, 13,265,105 were Americans arrested on marijuana charges, countless families have been destroyed by marijuana enforcement. To what end? The marijuana laws have not prevented nearly 80 million Americans from trying marijuana.”
There are many articles, websites and lots more in depth information that one can read and learn a lot. Below are couple links for more info.
ARC: Annual Rate of Change
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reporting Program
Michael Komorn is recognized as a leading expert on the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. He is the President of the Michigan Medical Marijuana Association (MMMA), a nonprofit patient advocacy group with over 26,000 members, which advocates for medical marijuana patients, and caregiver rights. Michael is also the host of Planet Green Trees Radio, a marijuana reform based show, which is broadcast every Thursday night 8-10 pm EST. Follow Komorn on Twitter.
