State v. Thompson

390 Wis.2d 834

939 N.W.2d 879 (Table)

2020 WI App 10

STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.Tyler N. THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal No. 2018AP1361-CR

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.

DATED AND FILED January 14, 2020

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Tyler Thompson appeals a judgment of conviction for possession of tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) as a second or subsequent offense and for possession of drug paraphernalia. The convictions resulted from Thompson’s pleas following the denial of his suppression motion. Thompson contends the circuit court erred by denying his motion. Specifically, he argues police officers unreasonably extended his traffic stop for a minor traffic offense in order to conduct a drug investigation without having reasonable suspicion to do so, thus violating his constitutional right against unreasonable seizures.

¶2 We conclude the officers extended the stop beyond the time necessary to address a relatively minor traffic infraction—i.e., failing to stop completely at a stop sign. We also conclude the extension of the traffic stop was not independently supported by reasonable suspicion that Thompson was engaged in a drug offense. Consequently, we reverse the judgment of conviction and remand with directions that the circuit court grant Thompson’s suppression motion.

BACKGROUND

¶3 Thompson was charged with possession of THC, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia, following the discovery of contraband in his vehicle after a traffic stop. Thompson filed a motion to suppress, alleging the police officers had unlawfully extended the traffic stop beyond the time necessary to address the traffic violation, leading to Thompson’s confession and the eventual discovery of the contraband. The court held an evidentiary hearing on the motion, at which officers Del Stone and Anthony Puetz testified.

¶4 Stone testified he was monitoring a "residence suspected in dealing narcotics" just after midnight on March 5, 2017. Another officer had requested that Stone observe the residence and "try to conduct traffic stops in the area of that location." A few minutes after midnight, Stone saw the headlights of a full-size pickup truck in the driveway activated. The pickup truck, which had several items in its exposed bed, left the driveway and headed south, then turned eastbound on Round Lake Road. Stone ran the truck’s registration, which was current and registered to a location in Grantsburg, Wisconsin.

¶5 Stone witnessed the truck fail to make a complete stop at the intersection of Round Lake Road and County Highway D. Stone continued to follow the vehicle for a time, as he did not want to stop it near the residence in which drug dealing was suspected. After traveling a sufficient distance from the residence, he performed a traffic stop. Stone approached and saw the driver, whom he identified as Thompson, as well as another male in the front passenger seat. Stone testified Thompson was "extremely nervous" and his hands shook when he attempted to retrieve his driver’s license from his wallet.

¶6 Stone informed Thompson of the reason for the stop, and Thompson was adamant that he came to a complete stop. Eventually Stone told Thompson he "didn't think that was a very big issue." Thompson volunteered that his plates were valid even though they did not display the current registration sticker, and Stone responded that he had already run the plates and knew the registration was current. Stone then asked Thompson from where he was coming and where he was going. Thompson stated he was coming from a residence on Round Lake Road. He told Stone he was not sure which residence, and he also stated he did not know anyone that was there. Thompson told Stone that he was there helping a friend named Sheyanne Whitaker move, and that the items in his truck bed were to be put in storage. Thompson stated the storage space was at his residence in Clam Falls, Wisconsin.

¶7 Stone then asked about Thompson’s residence. Thompson stated he lived next to a former deputy sheriff, Tamara Larson, whom Stone generally knew. Stone told Thompson that he was traveling in the opposite direction of Clam Falls. Stone then returned to his vehicle to run a criminal history check on the two individuals in the vehicle. At some point, Stone also ran a record check on Sheyanne Whitaker, but he could not find any record for a person by that name.

¶8 Officer Puetz, who had heard Stone call out the traffic stop, arrived on the scene while Stone was in his vehicle. Stone exited his vehicle and told Puetz that the driver was extremely nervous. Stone testified that he told Puetz he had "reasonable suspicion that there [were] narcotics in the vehicle and that [he] would be asking Mr. Thompson for consent to search the vehicle and likely using [his] K9 to sniff the area around the vehicle."¹ Stone then returned to his squad. Puetz testified Stone was "doing ... stuff in his squad. Talking to dispatch, whatever."

¶9 After speaking with Stone, Puetz approached Thompson. He asked Thompson to step out of his vehicle and asked him about where he was going. Thompson explained he was lost and had turned the wrong way, going south instead of north. Within the first one to two minutes of this conversation, Puetz informed Thompson that police were investigating suspected drug activity in the area. Thompson and Puetz then engaged in a discussion that lasted "quite a while," and included Thompson describing what he did for a living. After this "lengthy conversation," Puetz told Thompson he believed Stone was planning on running Stone’s dog around Thompson’s car. Thompson then admitted that he had "a half ounce" in his car, which Puetz understood to mean marijuana.² Thompson told Puetz where the marijuana and his pipe were located in the car. Puetz testified Thompson was cooperative throughout the process, although the officers also found methamphetamine that Thompson had not disclosed. At no time during Puetz’s interaction with Thompson did he ask Thompson about the failure to stop.

¶10 Stone could not recall exactly how long the traffic stop took from the time of the stop until Puetz began searching the vehicle. He believed he had detained Thompson for ten to fifteen minutes before Puetz arrived. During the stop, Stone never observed any contraband or smelled the odor of marijuana or other controlled substances. Stone testified Thompson also did not appear to be under the influence of any controlled substances. After the search, Stone issued a verbal warning for the failure to stop.

¶11 The circuit court denied the suppression motion following briefing. The court declined to specifically find any facts, noting the parties’ briefing had indicated agreement on the relevant facts.³ The court determined the initial traffic stop was lawful, and it viewed the relevant question as whether the information obtained after the stop created "independent, reasonable, articulable facts that criminal activity was afoot to change the direction of the investigation" from a traffic stop to a narcotics investigation. The court found that the totality of the circumstances—including the fact that Thompson’s vehicle had been located at a suspected drug house, the late hour, Thompson’s nervousness, his direction of travel, and his unverifiable story—supported the extension of the stop to investigate potential criminal activity.

¶12 After the denial of his suppression motion, Thompson reached a plea agreement with the State. He pleaded guilty to the possession of THC and drug paraphernalia charges, and the possession of methamphetamine charge was dismissed outright. The court withheld sentence on the THC charge and placed Thompson on eighteen months’ probation; on the drug paraphernalia charge, the court imposed and stayed a thirty-day jail sentence and placed Thompson on probation for one year concurrent with the THC charge. Thompson now appeals, challenging the denial of his suppression motion. See WIS. STAT. § 971.31(10) (2017-18).⁴

DISCUSSION

¶13 The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable seizures.⁵ State v. Wright , 2019 WI 45, ¶23, 386 Wis. 2d 495, 926 N.W.2d 157. This proscription applies to traffic stops, which are considered seizures for constitutional purposes. Id. A routine traffic stop is justified by reasonable suspicion that a traffic law has been or is being violated. State v. Houghton , 2015 WI 79, ¶30, 364 Wis. 2d 234, 868 N.W.2d 143.

¶14 Here, it is undisputed Stone had reasonable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop in the first instance based on Thompson’s failure to stop completely at the stop sign. Thompson contends the traffic stop became illegitimate (and his admissions and the physical evidence derived therefrom should be suppressed) because the officers extended its duration to conduct a drug investigation. Whether evidence should be suppressed is a question of constitutional fact. State v. Floyd , 2017 WI 78, ¶11, 377 Wis. 2d 394, 898 N.W.2d 560. We review the circuit court’s findings of historical fact under the clearly erroneous standard, but we independently apply those facts to the relevant constitutional principles. Id.

¶15 The permissible duration of a traffic stop depends upon the purpose for the stop. Wright , 386 Wis. 2d 495, ¶23 ; see also Rodriguez v. United States , 575 U.S. 348, 354 (2015). The stop may last no longer than is necessary to address the traffic violation that warranted the stop and to attend to related safety concerns. Rodriguez , 575 U.S. at 354. Certain ancillary investigations may be permissible as long as they do not lengthen the roadside detention beyond what is necessary to address the immediate violation. Id. (citing Arizona v. Johnson , 555 U.S. 323, 327-28 (2009) ; Illinois v. Caballes , 543 U.S. 405, 406 (2005) ).

¶16 Notably, the Supreme Court has held that during a traffic stop, an officer may make ordinary inquiries incident to the stop, beyond determining whether to issue a traffic ticket. Rodriguez , 575 U.S. at 355...