Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

10-2094 U.S. v. McBride

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 14, 2011//

10-2094 U.S. v. McBride

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 14, 2011//

Listen to this article

Search and Seizure
Scope and duration

Questions that added a couple minutes to the duration of a traffic stop did not unreasonably prolong the stop.

“In their content and duration, Gasvoda’s questions are hard to distinguish from inquiries by officers under similar circumstances that we have upheld as reasonable. See Taylor, 596 F.3d at 376 (several unrelated questions about drugs did not unreasonably prolong traffic stop); Muriel, 418 F.3d at 725-26 (routine inquiry about travel plans did not unreasonably prolong traffic stop); Childs, 277 F.3d at 953 (‘a minute or so’ of extra questioning was not enough to make traffic stop unreasonable). Gasvoda spent most of the stop performing routine police work—securing the scene, gathering information about the Monte Carlo and its occupants, relaying information to dispatch, and writing a ticket. The district court found that the additional questions extended the stop by ‘roughly two minutes’ at most. This was not unreasonable and did not convert a lawful stop into an unlawful one.”

Affirmed.

10-2094 U.S. v. McBride

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Springmann, J., Sykes, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests