Passenger ordered out of vehicle on traffic stop is proper

An officer stopped the vehicle in which Travis Demois Wilson was a passenger because the driver did not indicate a left turn until the vehicle had already entered the intersection and the driver failed to maintain a single lane while completing the turn. An additional officer arrived to assist. After the officers asked the driver and Wilson to exit the vehicle, the officers saw a pistol, contrary to Wilson’s assertion that there were no weapons in the vehicle. Based on this, the officers used a canine to conduct an exterior sniff of the vehicle. After the canine alerted to the presence of narcotics, the officers searched the vehicle, found methamphetamine, and ultimately arrested Wilson.

Prior to trial, Wilson filed a motion to suppress all evidence stemming from the traffic stop. The 5th affirmed.

Analysis

The legality of the traffic stop at issue is examined under the two- pronged analysis established in SCOTUS Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). Courts must first examine whether the officer’s action was justified at its inception, and then inquire whether the officer’s subsequent actions were reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the stop.

Regarding the first prong, the officer observed a white Dodge Challenger stopped at a red light in a lane that allowed vehicles either to continue straight or turn left. When the traffic light turned green, the vehicle proceeded toward the intersection and activated the left-turn signal only after entering the intersection. Texas Transportation Code § 545.104(b) requires drivers to “signal continuously for not less than the last 100 feet of movement of the vehicle before the turn.” Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding the officer had reasonable suspicion that the driver committed a traffic violation, justifying the initial stop.

Regarding the second prong, the officers were justified in ordering the driver and passenger (later identified as Wilson) to exit the vehicle pending the completion of the stop to ensure the officers’ safety. See SCOTUS Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408 (1997) (we therefore hold that an officer making a traffic stop may order passengers to get out of the car pending completion of the stop.); see also SCOTUS Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977). When Wilson exited the vehicle, the officers observed the grip of a pistol in plain view, protruding from underneath a backpack on the passenger-side floorboard. The driver and Wilson had previously denied that there were any weapons in the vehicle. This provided the officers with reasonable suspicion that the vehicle might contain contraband and justified their decision to extend the stop to conduct an exterior canine sniff of the vehicle.

The canine sniff of the vehicle was not an unlawful search. But after the canine alerted to the presence of narcotics, the officers had probable cause to search the vehicle and the backpack pursuant to the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. See SCOTUS Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (2013).