rodriguez there is no such thing as a de minimus detention once the officer issues a warning citation unless he has reasonable suspicion you cannot detain the occupants of the building but vehicle any further you know being very very nervous even after he told me he was just going to write a warning for her she was nervous nervousness standing alone is a very weak indicator this court recognized that in offices record you know of course you can be nervous in the presence of the police but not when they tell you they're just going to write you a warning nervousness was observed after he told her he was just going to give her a warning fright and even if you credit the testimony which we think you it's not you shouldn't credit it because based on the actual the video itself if you look at her conformant in the actual cam video she's not nervous she's joking with the officer she's going to be a nurse she's laughing it just does not show that she's nervous and we know from the standards case that recently came out that if there's a conflict between what's shown in the video and if the x walks is testimony then it should be the video that wins out and we think and i would just ask court to watch the video the video tells of the true story of what happened and what happened was miss smith was acting completely normal in the context of a traffic stop the officer claimed the in my view it's not credible but he claims that there were extreme signs of nervousness but nothing extreme in her comportment reflect it doesn't show it he's just in my view just making that up testifying to something in court to try to get the court to affirm his conviction well a video doesn't necessarily reveal the  exactly the same things that you see right well it might not reveal everything but i think that you can look at the video and i would urge the court again to look at the video and it will show that  what the touchdown is reasonable to us and this is a moral with respect to our second argument but you said if if he was suspicious if the officer was suspicious it should have called the canine unit earlier that's right but that wouldn't have helped well well the only authority that the officer had to continue to detain mr walton was in this mood and her sort of nervousness and that the circumstances of the st once miss smoot once he's resolved the traffic stop with respect to miss smoot and completed the mission of the traffic stop that he would have to have reasonable suspicion to continue it right and we know under sharp that he has to diligently pursue the investigation so when he goes and he wastes fourteen minutes talking about the same questions that he already had ed hashed out with them when he searches her bag she's already told him by the way that she has to she has an urgent need to urine it so it simply not reasonable that's the point of the second argument is that it's it's not reasonable to once you have reasonable suspicion even  for him to call a nine unit yes i think it was improper and it was and it would and would have been improper even if he'd done it earlier you're saying no i the second argument is an argument in the alternative so even if we lose our first argument which respectfully our position obviously is that we shouldn't but even if we lose that we can still win and if he's not diligently pursuing his investigation in a real as in a reasonable manner the reason why we say that he was not is that if indeed he had a reasonable suspicion as he he didn't claim that he said he was building reasonable suspicion which is the natural inference from that is that he didn't have in the first place but even if he did he should have called the the drug dogs right then and there are differences of make with close them earlier later what made a difference to her she had that she had to relieve herself so once the drug assuming the drugs were called it would have made a fourteen minute difference in between use the bathroom it's unbelievable you don't talk to me had enough reasonable suspicion to call the canine unit and you're just complaining that he didn't call it as early so let her bring a suit for anxiety call it a call caused by delay and call in the canine you know why do you let this guy out of you know his massive drug liability just because called the canine unit earlier it seems totally disproportionate you're already i don't think i'm going to convince you on the second point i'd like to return to the first point and if we could talk about p v different faces for reasonable suspicion first there is the travel plans i think we can eliminate this all together because there is nothing convoluted or implausible about the travel plans miss smoot her car broke down her boyfriend flew into denver drove her back to cincinnati there's nothing convoluted there's nothing plausible about that we can eliminate the trouble plans altogether as a basis for reasonable suspicion the same thing with the lack of luggage found essentially that the evidence was an equitable is whether he had a license or whether he did not an additional point on that you know it's it's not as if the car was stolen right he had a an agreement with dollar rent a car if you breach the agreement three times in the third minute i don't care i could care less he also said look you can cure that just by paying five dollars and putting her on the rental contract if you didn't care why should this court with regard to the  kansas stop look any inconsistency is easily reconcilable he thought it was a search she didn't think it was a search the laws ambiguous as to whether or not it is a search at least to the way person for your honor i'd like to reserve the please the court my name is alex quick and i'm with the southern district of illinois and i represent the government in this case and i would also like to note that i wasn't the attorney below but i'm familiar with the facts of the case through to speak to the the factors and just to hit on what the district court found in this case as far as reasonable suspicion is concerned there are ten things simple the plates basically trooper mcvicar observed a large it's like a trivial violation well that's that's just one of the three violations but an officer can stop someone  that mr walton did not have a seatbelt on and they're not really contesting that stop right not that i'm not that i'm aware of your honor and so you go to the next points which are about t not actual approved driver for the vehicle and mr walton had a suspended license and then you get to the kansas stop which was also brought up almost from the very beginning and car and speaks with her she says stop the not last for two hours and furthermore she also says that the vehicle was not searched during the time and there she was prosecuted  and mr walton flew one way to colorado from cincinnati to pick her up and bring her back from golden colorado to cincinnati but the problem with that is that there was one piece of luggage in the vehicle and later it searched and there's one change of clothes that's miss smoots bag for a multi day trip to colorado so being un clean your garments suspicious fish thing well it just doesn't jive with the multi is curious and suspicious of her stop it's a it's a twenty four hour trip to colorado several days there and then a stop back so it does seem it's wasn't ransomware you know close so that's just one of the factors you have to look at the totality of circumstances because under finck it says that things that are seemingly innocent could actually come together to be indicative of crimin video and determined that there was a nervousness by looking at that and so it's actually under a clear air standard at this juncture because it's a fact finding mission and i would say that if you actually do look at the video you can see kind of her heart beating out of her chest a little bit you get your heart beating and not physically out of the skin but you can see a kind of beat  later on you learn of the appellant's criminal history and that includes a drug trafficking conviction for the  yes your honor and so you take all of that stuff together and it and it lays a pretty firm groundwork for reasonable suspicion so then you move to the extended stop and during the extended stop trooper mcvicar speaks with miss smoot again kind of describes why he has reasonable suspicion to extend the stop and ask her a few questions  whether whether there were drugs illegal weapons in the car and then another one specifically whether there's cocaine in the car and both times she looks back to the vehicle and that didn't occur at any other time whenever she was asking her other questions  so it seemed to indicate again that there was something illegal in the car and then he asks after detailing the reasonable suspicion he asked if you can search the vehicle and this move kind of sa well i don't know if i'm if i'm actually qualified or you know if i can actually give permission because i didn't write the vehicle and so he asked her again because he wants her permission and mr walt and she says you know ask mr walton but she does agree to allow her back to be searched so then trooper mcvicar speaks with mr walton and he says no to the search but he does have something he has  has the bag to look into so in there could be something in there as well so he looks at the bag after he finds that he cannot search the car and there's nothing in the bag at that point he calls the dog and at that point it's about it get their criminal history that before he calls on the dog right yes your honor that's at about the ninety minute mark the the call to the canine unit is about thirty three minutes and thirty five seconds into the pasture it's boilerplate for this cop he testified in a similar proceeding in front of the same judge in this court and this court reversed his testimony they used the same phrase i will stiffen rigid posture and how can he even tell whether it's different rigid when the car he's in the median and the cars going by sixty eight mph not believable with respect to the dog sniffing kansas what are the odds that he has to constitutional violations in tonight's how many dog sniff have your owners been subjected to it's duffel bag right that's as much as could be expected her other bags were likely in her car in colorado and with regard to the other things look they were after the issuance of the warning ticket he learned about the criminal history after the warning ticket was issue