Opinion No. 17
from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District,
State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Michael Reardon, District
granting motions to suppress, reversed and remanded.
Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen,
Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for appellant. Kenneth K.
D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W.
Reynolds, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for
respondent Brian McGraw. Andrea W. Reynolds argued.
A. Fyffe, Boise, for respondent Lacey Killeen.
State appeals from the district court's orders granting
Brian McGraw's and Lacey Killeen's motions to
suppress evidence resulting from a search subsequent to a
drug-dog sniff conducted during a traffic stop. The State
argues that the officers did not abandon the initial purpose
of the traffic stop, and therefore the district court erred
in granting the suppression motions. For the reasons
explained below, we reverse and remand.
AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
on patrol, a police officer (Officer One) conducted a traffic
stop on a car driven by Killeen in which McGraw was a
passenger. A second officer (Officer Two), who was close by,
heard the stop over dispatch and arrived at the scene shortly
after the stop was initiated. During the course of the
traffic stop, Officer One questioned both McGraw and Killeen
regarding their probation and/or parole statuses, and McGraw
answered that he was on parole for delivery of marijuana.
After his initial conversation with Killeen and McGraw,
Officer One performed his routine functions for a traffic
stop including identifying the car's occupants through
dispatch, determining whether there were any outstanding
warrants, and checking Killeen's driver's license
status. Upon receiving returns from dispatch, Officer One
asked Killeen to step out of the car and advised her he was
going to have his canine sniff the car while he wrote a
citation. When Officer One removed Killeen from the car,
Officer Two engaged McGraw in conversation and ultimately had
him exit the vehicle as well.
Officer One was writing the citation, Officer Two volunteered
to complete the citation while Officer One deployed his
canine. Officer One transferred the citation writing task to
Officer Two and retrieved the canine. The canine alerted and,
as a result, the officers searched the vehicle. The search
produced marijuana, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia.
Killeen and McGraw were arrested and charged with possession
of a controlled substance and possession of paraphernalia.
The district court consolidated Killeen's and
and McGraw filed motions to suppress evidence obtained during
the search of Killeen's vehicle arguing, in relevant
part, that the traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged. The
district court granted the motion because Officer One
abandoned the original purpose of the stop. The State