Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-9972_p8k0.pdf
Page Number: 4

Cite as:  575 U. S. ____ (2015) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash­
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 13–9972 
_________________ 

DENNYS RODRIGUEZ, PETITIONER v.

 UNITED STATES
 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
 

[April 21, 2015] 

JUSTICE GINSBURG delivered the opinion of the Court. 
In  Illinois  v.  Caballes,  543  U.  S.  405  (2005),  this  Court 
held that a dog sniff conducted during a lawful traffic stop
does  not  violate  the  Fourth  Amendment’s  proscription  of 
unreasonable  seizures.   This  case  presents  the  question
whether  the  Fourth  Amendment  tolerates  a  dog  sniff
conducted after completion of a traffic stop.  We hold that 
a  police  stop  exceeding  the  time  needed  to  handle  the
matter for which the stop was made violates the Constitu­
tion’s  shield  against  unreasonable  seizures.    A  seizure 
justified  only  by  a  police-observed  traffic  violation,  there­
fore, “become[s] unlawful if it is prolonged beyond the time 
reasonably required to complete th[e] mission” of issuing a
ticket  for  the  violation.    Id.,  at  407.    The  Court  so  recog­
nized in Caballes, and we adhere to the line drawn in that 
decision. 

I 
Just  after  midnight  on  March  27,  2012,  police  officer
Morgan  Struble  observed  a  Mercury  Mountaineer  veer 
slowly  onto  the  shoulder  of  Nebraska  State  Highway  275 
for  one  or  two  seconds  and  then  jerk  back  onto  the  road.