Opinion ID: 3029843
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: length and scope of the investigation

Text: Mayo further contends that his detention exceeded Fourth Amendment limitations in both duration and scope. We conclude to the contrary.8 From the record, the maximum estimated time of the detention was forty minutes. Although the 7 Officer Golden, who arrived on the scene first, did not know all of these facts. The dispatcher told him to investigate suspicious narcotics activity and gave him a description of the cars involved, including Mayo’s. Collectively, however, officers knew all of these facts before Officer Golden detained Mayo and asked for his identification. See United States v. Sutton, 794 F.2d 1415, 1426 (9th Cir. 1986) (“We look to the collective knowledge of all the officers involved in the criminal investigation although all of the information known to the law enforcement officers involved in the investigation is not communicated to the officer who actually makes the stop.”). 8 We review de novo the question whether the initial detention exceeded its proper scope or duration. See United States v. Garcia-Rivera, 353 F.3d 788, 791 (9th Cir. 2003). UNITED STATES v. MAYO 739 duration of detention bears on whether a Terry stop is justified, there is no strict time requirement. United States v. Sharpe, 470 U.S. 675, 687 (1985) (holding that, under the circumstances, a twenty-minute detention was not too long); Haynie v. County of Los Angeles, 339 F.3d 1071, 1076 (9th Cir. 2003) (noting that a Terry stop does not have rigid time constraints so long as the officer conducts the investigation in a diligent and reasonable fashion). [3] Here, the officers conducted the investigation in a constitutional manner. The period of detention was permissibly extended because new grounds for suspicion of criminal activity continued to unfold. The officers pursued their multiple inquiries promptly as they arose: they questioned Mayo regarding their suspicion of narcotics activity; investigated the vehicle code violation; investigated Mayo’s attempted use of another’s credit card; investigated the connection between Mayo and Bindi, who returned to the scene while officers were questioning Mayo; searched Bindi’s Dodge Caravan; and questioned Mayo about the chemical odor associated with methamphetamine. A maximum of forty minutes to pursue all of these inquiries was not unreasonable. Therefore, the Terry detention did not exceed constitutional limits.