UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DONALD T. HILL
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Keenan, March 30, 2017,
Second Stop – As long as at least one officer is working diligently on the original reason for the stop (and therefore the stop does not last any longer than it otherwise would), a second officer can stay with the car and conduct an unrelated investigation.

(Dissent- Davis- every minute “spent seeking to confirm [the passenger’s] identity unreasonably prolonged the traffic stop”)

Facts
On October 20, 2014, Richmond City police officers were patrolling when they saw a car travelling at an estimated speed slightly exceeding the
posted speed limit, and observed the car cross a yellow, double-solid line marker in the center of the roadway.
The officers then conducted a traffic stop. The primary officer recognized both occupants of the car and knew them to have ties to violent crime.
The primary officer returned to the cruiser and ran both occupants for warrants, NCIC, and driver information. The primary learned that the driver was suspended and found records for both individuals. The primary called K-9 to the scene. The primary then ran both individuals through a departmental database to see prior interactions with Richmond PD. At this point, he heard his partner call out.
While the primary was working on the traffic stop, the secondary officer stayed with the vehicle and spoke with the occupants. Approximately 20 minutes after the stop began, the secondary officer got one of the occupants to admit that he had a gun. The secondary officer then yelled “gun!” and the officers recovered the weapon.
The occupant with the gun was a prohibited person, and so he was arrested, charged, and convicted.
On appeal, he argued that police illegally extended the stop past what was necessary for the initial reason (the traffic violation).
Law from the Case
Held: It was reasonable for one officer to work on the traffic stop while the other stayed with the vehicle, particularly where the occupants were known to have ties to violent crime.
Stop- Duration- A stop is only justified for the amount of time it takes to reasonably investigate the crime in question. Extending the stop past that point is illegal.
Secondary Stop- Unless there is reasonable suspicion of a second crime, extending a stop to conduct an investigation unrelated to the initial reason for the stop violates the Fourth Amendment. This is the case even if the stop is only extended a small amount.
Practice Note: If you are suspicious about a vehicle, it is important to get resources moving as early as possible so that you do not prolong the stop. Where you are reasonably certain that you want to investigate a vehicle, you can call for another unit to assist even before the car is stopped.
Secondary Stop- Justification- Once an officer has reasonable suspicion of a second crime, she can extend the stop as long as it takes to reasonably investigate both the secondary crime and the primary crime.
Secondary Investigations- As long as at least one officer is “diligently pursuing” the purpose of a stop, other officers may conduct an investigation unrelated to the initial reason for the stop. This must not extend the time it takes for the stop, however, unless reasonable suspicion of a second crime is developed.
Secondary Investigations: While a primary officer is “diligently pursuing” the initial stop, a second officer may question the occupants of a car on unrelated topics. An officer also may engage a K-9 unit to conduct a “dog sniff” around a vehicle.
Note: Participation of occupants in the secondary investigation must be voluntary at least until reasonable suspicion is developed for another crime.
Traffic Stop- Scope- An officer “diligently pursues” the traffic stop by inspecting a driver’s identification and license to operate a vehicle, verifying the registration of a vehicle and existing insurance coverage, and determining whether the
driver is subject to outstanding warrants.
Practice Note: Where a driver does not have a license or government-issued identification, it may be necessary to delay the stop until a search of NCIC/MVA databases can be done and a photograph obtained. If you were given only a name/DOB by the driver, a check via KGA will not show that the information actually belongs to the driver you have stopped.
Stop- Duration- Courts allow stops to be extended to conduct warrant checks because whether or not a suspect has a warrant is relevant to the safety threat posed by the suspect.
Stop- Duration- Searching a police database for information relevant to a suspect’s prior contacts with law-enforcement is a valid justification for extending a stop because it relates to the safety of the officer during the stop (just like a warrant check does).
Practice Note: The database searched by Richmond PD in this case may be similar to a search of BPD Navigator to view prior contacts will Baltimore PD. Keep in mind that this check is done for safety purposes. A relatively quick look may be justified, but spending an hour looking at Arrest Viewer suggests you aren’t really that concerned about the safety of the car stop.