Court Opinion

ID: 9822840
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 09:28:44.909571+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:39:11.094065
License: Public Domain

WYNN, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I fully concur in the majority opinion. I write separately to emphasize that while the Supreme Court omitted criminal background checks from its list of “ordinary inquiries” authorized incident to every traffic stop, Rodriguez v. United States, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1609, 1615, 191 L.Ed.2d 492 (2015), this Court in United States v. Green, 740 F.3d 275 (4th Cir.2014), held that a traffic stop was reasonably prolonged in order to conduct a background check because the driver’s “demeanor and behavior throughout the traffic stop in conjunction with [an outstanding] protective order [against the driver] raised concerns about officer safety.” Id. at 281.
In this case, the specific circumstances of the stop indicate the officer had at least some legitimate concern for his own safety. Thus, I agree with the majority opinion that “we cannot fault Ring — faced with a suspected member of a violent gang — for [inquiring into the motorist’s criminal record] here.” Ante, at 651.