as he was starting to follow defendant lerner testified that defendant fell below forty five miles an hour drastically reducing speed which is below the minimum made an erratic lane change without using a signal and then as you continue to follow or notice that she was staring at him through the rearview mirror then mr warner pulled up next to her in the lane the other way into the interstate maintaining the same route speed as her directly next to her and she failed to make eye contact i argue that this was a reasonable time under the circumstances here as well but that's specific that's exactly the opposite of what the pro yes the trial court made that finding directly after making the finding that there stop concluded ten minutes or so including the traffic stop in the fifteen minutes but the traffic stop ended and then the the detention was forty minutes approximately in this case  the reason the length of the time can be attributed to the fact that the canine unit was far away from the traffic stop here and they took the canine unit twenty five minutes to get there and there was no evidence presented or any reason to believe that the canine unit was unreasonable and reasonably delayed it just took that long from where the canine unit was to get to the traffic stop what if it would take two or three hours get i think that's a different story but i don't think twenty five years in a reasonable amount of time will i guess you have to balance it in though with wherever the stop is especially if there's reasonable suspicion involved here and i think it would be unreasonable to require a canine to canine unit to was wrong in finding that the length of the detention was unreasonable especially since it became right after the finding the erroneous finding that there was no reasonable suspicion that warner didn't have the requisite reasonable suspicion in five but i don't think nine minutes is an unreasonable reasonable suspicion but if the same time he goes on sabbath even with these factors which could show reasonable suspicion it's almost as if it doesn't matter well because the duration of the stock is too long in the last thing that  off on the side or if they are trying to monitor me in the rearview mirror so she wants to know what it is i'm going to do he's already suspicious so instead of instituting anything trying to do anything whoa and i can't i can't tell you right now what my in my car you think anything it's got to be i want to get i want to get to the also track police officers in my rearview mirror when i know that i've been going seventy two mins to sixty five the primary factor based on what i'm reading is fine he just thinks it's too long to durations to again i think i wonder if the trial court even needed to make that there's no there's no it was a straight line where it becomes a reasonable but i don't think the the time line here makes a decision unreasonable also with that in the twelve or thirteen minutes says multiple times because you knew it would take a long time for the pain you get there and also there's testimony that you went through a suit or went through that within them so that anybody's part and really in no way would have helped the state anyway that the delay only hurt them the canine unit being so far away only hurt them and then let the judge come to that finding and relied on in the status of this was some suspicion occurred before you entered the tech let's assume that this ten minutes is reasonable amount of time for him to right to take it and he wasn't delaying it in order to try to go fishing or something ok just for the sake of argument he answer the take and he says at that point the duration again it could be a minute or it could be forty minutes which is what we had here after he ended the citation and it doesn't matter it's too long under these facts it's clearly too long and i think the big problem in th clear that he's allowed to take steps to further assume again assuming a reasonable suspicion is allowed to take steps to sort of furthers investigation to try and get to the bottom of whatever it is he suspects only suspected drug activity arguably asking her for permission to search her car again assuming it was in the suspicious not that's not unreasonable because if she says yes and he searches that he doesn't find drugs presumably she goes on the way if he does find drugs stops over and we're not waiting for you for the dog show but he way he asks or not yes sir get out apparently then he shows of his preprinted consent form as if that's going to change her mind i think there's some implication that he said something on lines of what we're going to call the dog anyway just you know just sort of agreed to the you know the search after some point that's a waste of time and only it was thirteen minutes i mean i should have paid thirty seconds it's a it's a twelve or thirteen minute waste of time and then on top of that there are twenty five minutes to wait for the time work you know you're ok under a year over year you're over you know around the clock start the stopwatch we have to look at the toronto time but also how we spent that time and i think this first fifteen minutes besides the total time is really what's problematic here because all it certainly do was extended attention which is counsel noted supreme court says that you're not supposed the state's burden to show that the duration was as short as possible so the fact that took that almost a half an hour show up doesn't help but again it's this first point this court that i think the trial court did approach it correctly my the point that i'm trying to get across is that if you have factors that are just so unreliable low hunch or less you can't just show them into a fatality the circumstances and then say well we've got a tally of circumstances so we have you know four or five weeks factors but at all together that makes for a better you know that makes for a better case so you know the sum of all is equal and you know is greater than the individual well that's not the way it's supposed to work and if i could get it and there's also some discussion about an ascent you know explaining away factors with innocent explanations i'd like to this give a brief example if an officer stops someone and  common everyday items that the person you know batteries for flashlights coffee filters for coffee sudafed for the sniffles whatever the case may be but that's an appropriate totality of the circumstances because all those three things three things together something th yasser offers testimony which links those things with a suspected criminal conduct which in that case of being at the family production then we have a reasonable totality of circumstances we don't have that kind of situation here in which we have this sure exactly and then she doesn't look at me well everyone either sammy or doesn't look at me so that suspicious she's driving on interstate seventy two therefore she's automatically suspected to be a drug for her she's nervous i mean these are it's hard to imagine brought her factors for  this doesn't even need to reach the duration because there was no reasonable suspicion if the court finds that there was a reasonable suspicion the duration was too long primarily because of this time they spent after handing the citation and prior to calling for the r lerner testified that he asked a few times and explain to the defendant that it would take a while for her it would take it would be quicker for them to to do this stop with her consent then with wait for another officer to get there no purpose but to harm there was no reason for the state or the policeman to to extend the stop at that point except to try to get him sent it did not benefit only hurt the state for him to try to extend the stop at that point as a result because of this argument now if you would instantly call that when you when you develop the requisite reasonable suspicion i guess we wouldn't be here because there would be no argument but  because he did because he tried to get consent to make it easier for all parties it wasn't it wasn't irrationally extending the the length of the stop because the there was no i don't think it went like that in fact i wouldn't be surprised if this estimation when the traffic stop ended and when he called the canine unit off and it was it was less than twelve or thirteen minutes but even if it was i think that