United States v. Landeros

Law enforcement officers may not extend a lawfully initiated vehicle stop because a passenger refuses to identify himself, absent reasonable suspicion that the individual has committed a criminal offense. The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained in a traffic stop.The panel held that Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015), partially abrogated United States v. Turvin, 517 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2008), and that the district court committed legal error by approving the duration of the stop based on Turvin, rather than Rodriguez. In this case, the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to believe that defendant was out past his curfew or was under drinking age. Therefore, the extension of the traffic stop based on these concerns was an unlawful seizure. Furthermore, defendant's repeated refusal to identify himself did not constitute a failure to comply with an officer's lawful order under Arizona law. The evidence was only discovered because defendant was ordered out of the car as part of the unlawful extended seizure. View "United States v. Landeros" on Justia Law