On April 21st the Supreme Court stated that an ordinary traffic stop may not be extended by a police officer to seek evidence of a crime that is unrelated to that which prompted the officer to pull over the vehicle

The ruling came about when Denny Rodriguez was pulled over and issued a warning for driving on the shoulder of a road in Nebraska. As the officer carried out the standard traffic stop procedure he came suspicious that Rodriguez was in possession of an illegal substance. Rodriguez had to wait on the side of the road as the officer inspected his vehicle with a drug-sniffing dog. The dog alerted him that there were drugs present inside of the vehicle. After a search of the vehicle the officer found methamphetamine within the car.

However the Supreme Court voted 6-3 that prolonging a traffic stop is outside an officer’s jurisdiction. An officer may ask you for your license, registration, proof of insurance, and they may check for any outstanding warrants; because those are the determinants that ensure a vehicle is being operated safely. The amount of time involved to carry out this basic procedure is unimportant, but if a traffic stop is prolonged beyond the time needed to complete the standard traffic based inquiries it is considered unlawful.

Rodriguez won his case at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, but because he was in possession of a substance that is illegal on the federal level he may still face legal trouble. But that is up to the lower courts to decide.

-Patrick Thompson