90.2K

Verified Solution

Link Copied!

2RA state trooper stopped a defendant for speeding five miles per hour over the speed limit on an interstate highway. Initially, the trooper only intended to issue the defendant a warning, but when the defendant refused the trooper's request for a consent search of the car for drugs, the trooper retrieved his narcotics-detection dog from the patrol car and walked around the defendant's car. The dog alerted at the trunk. Based on that alert, the trooper searched the trunk and found several grams of cocaine in the defendant's locked suitcase. The defendant was arrested. The entire incident took less than ten minutes, and it was recorded on a video camera located in the patrol car. Prior to his jury trial, the defendant's attorney filed a motion to suppress the cocaine based on an illegal search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Should the defendant's motion be granted? a. Yes, because the dog's alert only provided probable cause and a warrant would be required to search the trunk b. Yes, because the use of the dog converted the encounter from a lawful traffic stop into a drug investigation without reasonable suspicion of contraband c. Yes, because the use of a dog under these circumstances was unrelated to the initial purpose of the traffic stop and violated the defendant's legitimate expectation of privacy d. No, because the cocaine was lawfully seized

Answer & Explanation Solved by verified expert

See Answer