Ryan Steck v. State

RYAN LAWRENCE STECK v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Battaglia, November 28, 2018,
K-9 – A K-9 isn’t required to give its “final alert” in order to establish probable cause that a vehicle contains CDS.

Facts:
In 2016, Ocean City PD performed a car stop on a vehicle occupied three times after observing an unsafe lane-change in which the suspect vehicle pulled out in front of a taxicab, causing the cab to hit his brakes in order to avoid a collision. When the vehicle didn’t pull over for three blocks, a K-9 unit was requested.
The K-9 unit arrived on scene while officers were still writing the written warning for the lane change.
The occupants, including Ryan Steck (back seat passenger), were removed from the vehicle and sat on a nearby curb while Deputy Larmore, the K-9 handler, began his scan along with Simon, his K-9.
Deputy Larmore testified:
“I get up to scan the vehicle with my K-9 partner. I give him his command to scan the vehicle… And at that point in time, I notice a change of his breathing and posture and his general behavior. And it’s consistent with when he’s in the odor of narcotics…
When he got in the area of the rear passenger door, Your Honor, he began to go back and forth between sniffing the vehicle and sniffing the gusts of wind that were blowing from the general direction of the occupants. So, basically, at this point in time, he is showing the signs of behavior of being in odor, but he’s actually going back and forth, trying to pull me in different directions.”
The deputy explained that since Simon was “kind of, fighting two different odors here, he won’t actually go into what’s called a final alert, which is his sit. That’s his trained response. All of the other responses that he’s giving me are involuntary responses. Those are the responses that he gives when he’s in the odor of” marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, or ecstasy (the drugs in which he is certified).
The deputy concluded that, at the time of the scan, he considered there to be two sources of the odor – the vehicle and the occupants.
Another officer on scene asked Steck if he had any drugs and/or illegal weapons and Steck replied the he “had a blunt.” Steck recovered a “clear plastic bag containing marijuana” and handed it to the officer.
At this point, officers searched the vehicle and recovered 1,000 bags of heroin.
Steck moved to suppress the CDS, arguing that it was the result of an illegal search. This was denied, and Steck was convicted.
Steck then appealed, arguing that: 1) the car stop was illegal, 2) the stop was prolonged to allow K-9 to arrive, and 3) there was no probable cause to search the car, since the K-9 didn’t give its final alert.

Held: The Court held that the stop and search were legal.

Traffic Stop – A traffic stop may be conducted “where the police have
a reasonable suspicion supported by articulable facts (RAS) that criminal activity is afoot.”

From the Case – There was RAS to stop the car where the officer, “who had a clear and unobstructed view of the event,” “observed the Impala pull out in front of a taxicab, which caused the taxicab to hit his brakes in the roadway.”

Traffic Stop – A traffic stop can only last as long as is necessary to effect the purpose of the stop. It can’t be prolonged to wait for K-9 or conduct unrelated investigations.

Traffic Stop – An ordinary traffic stop “stop should be limited to the
period of time reasonably necessary for the officer to:
(1) investigate the driver’s sobriety and license status
(2) establish that the vehicle has not been reported stolen
and (3) issue a traffic citation”

Second Stop – “Once the mission of the original traffic stop has been completed, the continued detention of a vehicle and its occupants constitutes a second stop and must be independently justified by reasonable suspicion.”

K-9 Scan – A K-9 scan during a traffic stop is not a Fourth Amendment search and does not require any additional justification. “It is perfectly legitimate to use a drug detection dog during a traffic stop as a free investigative bonus, as long as the traffic stop is still genuinely in progress.”

K-9 Scan – A K-9 scan becomes a separate stop that must be justified if the officer has completed the stop or should reasonably have completed the stop before the K-9 scan begins (police can’t delay a stop just to wait for K-9 to arrive).

From the Case: The K-9 scan did not count as a “second stop” because “the judge found, based on the evidence at the suppression hearing, that Officer McBride was processing the citation at the time of the scan.”

Vehicle Search – A vehicle can be searched without a warrant as long as there is probable cause that evidence or contraband will be found there.

Probable Cause – Probable cause to search exists where there are “reasonable grounds” to believe that evidence of a crime will be found in a particular location

K-9 Alert – When a qualified drug detection dog alerts to a vehicle, there is probable cause to conduct a warrantless search of that vehicle.

K-9 PC – If a K-9 does not give its final alert, probable cause requires consideration of the dog’s reliability and training seen through the expertise of the handler.

From the Case: “In the present case, again, the judge found Deputy Larmore’s testimony ‘compelling’ to inform the handler that it was probable that drugs would be found in the Impala. The judge’s finding was supported by Deputy Larmore’s testimony, wherein he explained that he recognized Simon’s behavior to be ‘consistent with when he’s in the odor of narcotics’ and provided a credible explanation as to why Simon went ‘back and forth’ between the vehicle and its occupants sitting on the curb.”

From the Case: The K-9’s actions, as interpreted by the handler, gave a reasonable belief that evidence of drugs would be found in the car.

Leave a Reply