Court Opinion

ID: 9492980
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 14:54:33.739061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:55:34.866763
License: Public Domain

MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in the panel majority opinion. United States v. Brugal, 185 F.3d 205 (4th Cir.1999). Brugal was lawfully detained at a traffic checkpoint. After Brugal produced a valid driver’s license and vehicle rental agreement, the police retained the rental agreement and instructed Brugal to pull his car onto the shoulder of the highway.. The continued detention of Brugal was lawful only if the police possessed reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot.
I agree with the district court that the factors relied upon by the officers do not add up to reasonable suspicion and do not serve to protect a substantial portion of innocent travelers from the intrusion of a police investigation. I must conclude, therefore, that Brugal’s continued detention was unconstitutional, and I would accordingly affirm the suppression of the evidence subsequently found in the defendant’s trunk.
*370Judges Widener, Michael and Motz join in this dissent.