reasonable suspicion of criminal activity alternatively clock force mutlaq probable cause to search mr young as his vehicle turning to the st issue after the warning was issued the justification for the initial stop had concluded and the officer needed reasonable suspicion to extend the seizure as a preliminary matter the officer did not identify what criminal activity he was relying upon to justify the extended seizure this court was previously critical of that  purposes the circumstances were material in the sodomy case and those circumstances st off his license was suspended so mr saddam and i wasn't even legally driving but there was again not all simply innocent factors and those case in that circumstance mr saddam and story was fish as a way to put it he stated that he was going to see his father when law enforcement talked to  his father so is that why i wasn't expecting him i think he indicated his father was terminally ill and also mr saddam was known to have a history of drug trafficking so while there are some similarities that is materially  officer shiels at the time and believe that there wasn't enough time in the rental agreement for mr yon has to drive from california to iowa stay in iowa for forty five days and then drive home that's not necessarily a discrepancy that's just an oddity because as it was later found out mr yana said his plan was to fly back home after visiting iowa which again might not be the norm but it's not unheard of and it's distinguishable from you know saying actually like in other cases that side in our brief being consistent on where you're going or changing your story on where you're going it seems kind of odd but it's not being caught in a lie it's a rental but if it could just be i'm not remembering correctly my recollection of officer shields testimony was more conclusive conclude henri where it was just it didn't add up from where the mystery of us was telling him that much i'm confident on with that officer shiels assessment of the rental agreement and one thing that was discussed in these circumstances that ups are shields to term and amounted to reasonable suspicion was that mr younis was attempting to control conversation how the traffic stopped preceded it after once he was pulled over as mr yon as was pulled back into the squad car to allow officer shields to issue the warning for speeding and  that lucian only makes sense if the statements by mr yana as i looked at it nicely when reviewing the video of the actual conversation both parties are very cordial and conversational this isn't a situation where is because imagine what a ring of the stomach which would indicate maybe some extreme numbers that's what's your what's your response to that particular factor so two things your honor i would note st in general nervousness is considered incredibly weak when nervousness becomes more important is when it's nervous evasive behavior and there's no indication and nothing i think argued or the record that would indicate mr yonex was being  driver there seemed especially nervous and the circuit was critical of that and saying well you don't know this individual how do you know what's normal nervousness for this person i also think it's necessary to look at it based on the circumstances this wasn't like a traditional traffic stop where you know the driver sitting in the driver's seat mystery on us was pulled back to the squad car so if there is a little bit more nervousness than the typical traffic stop i think it could easily be explained by because i don't even know what stomach fluttering exactly would look like a tard for me to visualize what that even would be but i don't know if that would rise to the level of extreme nervousness and i don't think that after shields believe that mr yon as was extremely nervous i don't want to put words into his mouth but usually in these kinds of suppression hearings when someone is overly nervous officers are clear to explicitly say so and assert it i mean there's no there was a statement by the opposite that he was nervous and obviously that was a finding but in general i think it's an incredibly weak factor for this court to rely upon in some point though your client consented to the search of the backseat to  kind of the initial basis stopped law enforcement then deployed the dropped out that was about two and a half minutes where officer shiels was walking the dog around and i don't think it was a very significant period of time when then after show up their shells came back and asked for consent to search so it wasn't it wasn't significant after the drug dog in the dr you want to address the probable cause to search the trunk yes your honor alternately even if the court determines that the exception of the stop was reasonable the evidence still must be excluded because there was not sufficient probable cause to search the vehicle again these are all innocent factors that the court is relying upon to justify reasonable suspicion of irks me probable cause to search the  vehicle things that seem odd but it can't be explained by non criminal conduct it doesn't seem like there's a lot of luggage there's the spare tire that's been moved again on but combine our that the rental car company will lose this very tired of the back seat is never a suspicious why am i wrong about that so i would agree that that is probably the strongest factor in the government's favor supporting the search but again it doesn't rise to the level of probable cause of drug trafficking there are many reasons why a spare tire might not be where you think it's supposed to be one of those a stretch trafficking but it could be a whole different list of things that in such a short encounter are possible what deputy shields was looking that he testified on and the court specifically credit the best of money that the amount of time that the rental agreement indicated  about took about two minutes or two and a half minutes for the canine to be deployed and at that point deputy shiels returned patrol car and ask or consent to search into the bathtub to smoke and go back to the luggage the only real statements that's kind of off and stand by officer shields is well i didn't see any luggage or not that it was dark outside he was on the side of a highway and again couldn't see in the trunk and when watching the video backpack you just have a backpack or something to that effect so it really wasn't until that point that there's really anything that can be meaningfully relied upon as far as the what luggage mr younis did or did not have for his some looking around but nothing that seems overly odd or suspicious for a person to be who has been put back in a patrol car i think that's something that is really subject to just opinion i think you could also say it's odd if someone was sitting in the patrol car looking straight ahead and not moving in any way shape or form but nothing about his mannerisms or how he is reacting is inherently suspicious and finally going back to the discussion of the one way trip i wanted to highlight the white case out of the circuit and there that side that one is cited in the brief there was a one white flight who was bought with cash which is you know not criminal but a little odd and law enforcement saw the individual carrying the carry on and what they believed was an odd man or this court rejected that that was enough to detain someone that didn't amount to reasonable suspicion so again i think it's inconsistent with the argument that we're putting forward this combination of oddities isn't sufficient to justify reasonable suspicion to justify the exception of the traffic stop there also are you remember you were back a i figured out how  correct that wasn't cited in our briefs but i do think it again supports our case because it's and i feel like i'm repeating myself but it's consistent with things that just might seen somewhat odd  rental cars they think oh wait you see these a lot rental cars and general officer say it makes them suspicious like the trips things that might to a trained officer seem suspicious but just aren't enough to rise to the level of reasonable articulable suspicion it's more of a hot and i think that's what we have here course we have a great big difference in that case the officer actually telling that with tell back at one point he was free to go that i don't