however the court did not surprise narcotics recovered from within mr leaders because some thirty five to forty five minutes later after the stop factually the defendant was stopped on i eighty scene conducting a free air sniff the vehicle while the arresting officer was issuing a warning some time before the officer or the trooper finished issuing his warning  performance in this case is the trooper could not testify to any degree of certainty as to the canines reliability in the field and it wasn't that the defendant chose not to question the office reliability in the field were in a controlled environment he was unable to testify as to success rates he actually testified one thing he testified specifically to you with respect to control to us was that there were times when mic report that was tendered in discovery one stop on the side of the road and i eighty the rock wrong as i indicated rule was conducted within a few minutes of the stock and then hansard commands were for over twenty minutes shooters conducted outside of the can i was present to hand search the vehicle with negative results you know the people in this case alerted to the passenger side door on the side of the ro more requirements for him will certification however the trooper testified that the certification that rico was awarded in about may of twenty twelve was only valid for one year testify as to what determines or how the length of time for which a certification is valid argument is it's the state's shifted the burden to the state to prove that rico was reliable and that not only the certification in the length of time it is valid for but also these training exercises in this case trooper digraph testified that twice a month ten hours each day with those months of about twenty hours a month that this detention road side bastid for about thirty minutes in the opponent's argument is that if these arrest was unlawful and him if this is the tension after thirty minutes being on the side of the boat without wright like to ask you a question about something that i personally have never seen in one of these traffic stop cases and that is the testimony that the officers on the car because he was directed by another policeman to do their own it's still it sounds like this was not a routine traffic stop it was basically a soldier fears for the continuation of  that there weren't any prior crimes that he was aware of and when pressed in the middle of a pretrial motion he finally acknowledged that there were there was other information and the state's explanations of the trial mean before the trial court was that well judge he's just doing his best to try to help the state or something along those lines after that those materials were disclosed in the midst of a pretrial motion and then it became quite clear that the officers were conducting an investigation we would argue that the particulars of that our investigation are not sufficient or reliable to conduct the search in the intrusion resulted in this case but certainly officers after disclosure was made in the midst of a pretrial motion clearly knowledge that this is an ongoing investigation and that the traffic stop was just a pretext for something else and we know that's true because trooper digraph to cheat on him to where arrived within about a minute or two according to his testimony and what the video shows within a minute or two of what was supposed to just be a speeding of a traffic offense where in the defined it was to avoid continue your investigation by getting a search warrant absolutely if you're a judge and getting a search warrant do we treat this as an ordinary chance that this was not an ordinary ordinary traffic stop this is jurisdictions from different states participating in a surveillance exercise without a camera without a video without conducting any photo or raise without producing any particulars as to where or when the drugs were being transported to who were being transported the prices of these drugs there wasn't any ever any money exchanged in this case this certainly was it this traffic stop was nothing more within about five to seven or so minutes after the initial stop in the troopers agreed that the hand search did not commence until after that point in time so this is the search that was conducted here had nothing to do with the traffic stop the search that was conducted here is similar to the search searches that were conducted and people the polling and people in iraq these were searches that were conducted separate from and unrelated to the traffic stop and in fact in this case unlike those cases mr pleaded did not conduct himself in any way that was suspicious he didn't give any conflicting statements  yeah well i understand your your position your honor but we have to consider this from the point of view of trooper kuranda not necessarily the nurses agents who had all this background information that task force he would have known that in this case he saw the man speak seven miles above the posted speed limit the stop is valid and i understand your your point but there was certainly background information here but that doesn't make the violation go away are still traffic violation trooper corrado still saw it and he didn't know why he was driving stopped this individual so yes in that respect it was a little unique and you know  the dog alerted to the way he's trained to look for drugs there is a different alert for guns he lays down on guns and other types of contraband but for drugs the dog changes breathing patterns and such and then sits there so they didn't do a complete search of the vehicle so they still had reasonable grounds probable cause to take the car into a more thorough search in safe condition and at the  car apart they hadn't done a complete search well there is more to go to be searched they didn't take anything for me engine compartment at all because as i said it was starting to rain it was dark and so it your hon information that he had produced something from the engine compartment you know the methamphetamine and so they had information that they could provide which enhanced probable cause we had the dogs you know we had if this other knowledge that imputed to the other officers to especially when you're right on the scene so field he did not have complete records you know he tailed ratios and such that he kept but he says it good rico had never given to her i'm sorry had given him unknown responses  training which is where the reason for the alert was later discovered but michael had never given a false positive by learning on an alert in a training life that had never had any kind of drugs in the whatsoever the fact that he couldn't quantify it doesn't change the never part of his testimony this is the dog that never alerted to a false positive were no drugs had ever been in it read or did most of the winners are asian because of a broken leg but it was recertified in july twenty thirt learning about the training methods the amount of time tree the the lack of false positives the fact that every time the dog had a unknown response it was later discovered why there was a known risk in the response so it wasn't a false positive the dog always was accurate in training so i think that this when alone is enough to support that the dog was still reliable at the time of the traffic stop i want to ask you one more question if i'm driving on the right to completely dismantle my car because of the dog owner i don't think there's any peace love sport that i would say no ok then i'm still wanting to know where the probable cause is from the dog alert to go beyond the search that they had already done where they found nothing to take the car into shanahan's so that they could dismantle it i think in this case because we have additional information from the other taskforce that they had been provided the drugs that added to the probable cause if you were just taking to stop alone with no other information if they couldn't find anything at that time then i agree that likely there would be no probable cause to take the car but in this case we had additional information that that the defendant from that vehicle from the engine compartment had provided methamphetamine he was driving along on the highway the same vehicle and there was a you know worked so this all ties together in we we have to remember that the conditions were great on the side of the road it was really clean conditions i'm sure you were about to ask questions so they were following up with this search because of probable cause that they had from an investigation that they had chosen not to get a warrant for a two  i don't know choosing not to get a war is supported by the evidence in this case i do i think because we had a consent to search that we didn't have to have a search warrant under the case  on you would have had to have a search warrant to follow up your investigation short of stopping your money with but again we had a second consent search by mr than seven days without any intervening circumstances vehicle and probable cause of this without a wire and without any other intervening circumstances or information for at least six or seven days because that's how many days passed without new information before officers are safe because what is a criminal investigation that must be supported by a warrant or probable cause can be run around the traffic stop officers putting up on june fifth sixth of all the way up to first place where officers did not do that and what is different about this case from others is that the canine was waiting in the wings right there within a minute or two of the