United States v. Carey
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
The Government takes this interlocutory appeal from the district court’s suppression order. We review de novo the district court’s determination that reasonable suspicion did not exist;
The district court ruled that the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop Carey for driving without a license plate, but that reasonable suspicion dissolved once they determined that Carey’s van bore a proper temporary registration sticker, so Carey’s detention beyond that point was unconstitutional.
We reverse. Detective Sweet reasonably approached Carey’s window without first closely inspecting the temporary registration sticker, because contacting the driver protected his and Agent Baker’s safety.
The officers had reasonable suspicion to detain Carey for drug trafficking
REVERSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
. United States v. Tiong, 224 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir. 2000).
. Id.
. See United States v. Dexter, 165 F.3d 1120, 1126 (7th Cir. 1999). Cf. Ruvalcaba v. City of Los Angeles, 64 F.3d 1323, 1327-28 (9th Cir. 1995) (holding that police officer may order passengers of vehicle to step outside to ensure his safety).
. United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266, 122 S.Ct. 744, 750, 151 L.Ed.2d 740 (2002) (internal quotation marks omitted).
. Cf. Tiong, 224 F.3d at 1139-1140.
. 268 F.3d 719 (9th Cir. 2001).
. Id. at 724-27.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I dissent. Once Officer Sweet had ascertained that Carey had a proper driver’s license and registration, the detention should have ended. See United States v. Chavez-Valenzuela, 268 F.3d 719, 724-25 (9th Cir. 2001). The record suggests that Agent Baker discovered the snow-covered bag after that point; if there is any doubt on that score, we should require further findings rather than simply reversing.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellant v. Peter Bernard CAREY, Jr., Defendant—Appellee
- Status
- Published