Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Suppression upheld

William L. Brown won in State v. Turpin, No. 98,071 (Kan. App. Oct. 5, 2007) (unpublished), affirming Judge Dickinson's suppression of evidence in a Harvey County drug prosecution. The COA applied a recent KSC case to review in detail the totality of the circumstances of the extension of a traffic stop:
Like the Thompson case, this is one of those very close cases, with factors supporting both a coercive and a consensual encounter. Although we avoid any focus on a single factor, we note that to endorse the legality of this encounter would seem contrary to the Mitchell case, where our Supreme Court clearly held that once the reason for the initial stop has been fully investigated, persons detained must be allowed to leave without further delay. Although an officer may ask occupants of a vehicle to exit incident to a valid traffic stop, we do not believe such a request may be made after the initial basis for the stop has been fully investigated and concluded. See Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408, 414-15 (1997). We conclude that under the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable person would not feel free to decline the officer's request for further questioning. The district court did not err in so holding.

[Update: the state did not file a PR and the mandate issued November 8, 2007.]

No comments: