In one of its three opinions today, the Supreme Court of Virginia found that an officer did not impermissibly extend a traffic stop by spending approximately twelve seconds asking whether the driver had drugs or weapons in her vehicle.
Officer Jordan Allen stopped Nafeesa Rausham Knight-Walker on suspicion of driving on a suspended license. Once stopped, he determined that her license was suspended and that she had multiple prior convictions for the same offense. He told her that he would not arrest her, but that she could not drive away. Knight-Walker’s passenger could not drive the car, so she said she would call her son to come get them. At that point, before any summons had issued and before her suspended license had been returned, Officer Allen asked in a twelve-second exchange whether she had any weapons or drugs. Knight-Walker said no, but ultimately consented to a search, and Officer Allen found drug paraphernalia in the glove box.
The circuit court denied Knight-Walker’s suppression motion, and a divided Court of Appeals panel reversed. But the Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the Court of Appeals, reasoning that the mission of the stop was still ongoing at the time of the inquiry because Knight-Walker could not lawfully drive away and the officer had a continuing obligation to control the scene until someone with a valid license arrived. The extended contact with two occupants and an uncertain wait time also heightened legitimate officer safety concerns. The Court further held that Knight-Walker’s consent was untainted, and noted independently that a mere request for consent does not constitute an impermissible extension of a stop because a driver remains free to refuse.
A Virginia Appellate Law Blog 