ANTHONY SANTOS v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Beachley, Oct. 26, 2016,
Investigative “Terry” Stop – During car stop for a traffic violation, reasonable suspicion existed to detain the driver where he was nervous, sweating, and lied to officers about stopping and meeting with another individual. Moreover, a warrant check on the driver came back with two possible warrants, and the officers had developed probable cause before the warrant check was finalized.
Facts: Baltimore County officers were on unmarked patrol outside the Eastpoint Mall McDonald’s when they observed a vehicle parked “away from the restaurant itself, though spaces were available closer to the McDonald’s.” The officers knew the parking lot to be “highly concentrated for narcotics transactions.”
A male was in the driver’s seat and a female was in the front passenger seat. Both occupants were “looking around” as if checking for police. The female then exited the vehicle wearing pajama pants and went inside to sit with a male. The driver left while “manipulating” his cell phone and not wearing a seat belt.
Officers stopped the driver and noted that he was “sweating profusely” and trembling. The driver said that he just came from the mall and hadn’t stopped anywhere or met with anyone. While backup units stayed with the driver, the officers returned to the McDonald’s and located the female who stated that she had “already used” what she received from the driver. She stated that the driver retrieved the heroin from behind the passenger’s seat of the car.
Officers returned to the scene and conducted a search of the vehicle. Located behind the passenger seat was a modified WD-40 can with suspected CDS.
TR 22-106 limits enforcement of vehicle equipment provisions (including seatbelt violations) to “uniformed police officer[s].”
Traffic Stop – Unrelated Investigation – “An officer’s inquiries into matters unrelated to the justification for the traffic stop… do not convert the encounter into something other than a lawful seizure, so long as those inquiries do not measurably extend the duration of the stop”
Traffic Stop – Time limitation – Detention during a car stop “must be temporary and last no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop.” Once the underlying basis for the stop is finished, there can be a continued (“second”) stop only if the driver consents or the officer has reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot.
Investigative (“Terry”) Stop – Duration – An investigative stop “cannot be measured by the clock alone.” It may last as long as it takes an officer to “diligently pursue[] a means of investigation… likely to confirm or dispel their suspicions quickly.”