The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals decided a police officer's observation of a traffic violation, however minor, gives the officer probable cause to stop a vehicle, even if the officer would have ignored the violation but for a suspicion of criminal activity.

A Nebraska trooper pulled over a driver who committed several traffic violations: no front license plate, following too closely, displaying an obstruction, and speeding. The driver signed a written consent form to search the vehicle.

Appellant Victor Barragan, a passenger, gave oral consent to search.

The trooper discovered a false compartment filled with several handguns with ammunition, a semi-automatic gun with scope, and 16 vacuum-sealed packages of currency totaling over $485,000. All three occupants of the car denied knowledge of the compartment.

Barragan claimed the length of the stop was unreasonably long and rendered his consent to search invalid and the arrest lacked probable cause.

Further, he alleged the trooper violated his privacy and exceeded the scope of any consent when he broke into the false compartment.

The 8th Circuit court held that the trooper's conduct was reasonable. The computer checks took longer than normal because the vehicle was registered in a state other than where it was purchased. Moreover, detention was necessary and justified, due to the various time-consuming tasks related to a traffic violation.

As for Barragan's privacy claim, the court looked to Rakas, a Supreme Court holding that defendants do not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the glove compartment or area under the seat in a car in which they are "merely passengers."

Inf.: U.S. v. Barragan, 03-3872, 8th Circ., Aug. 17. The circuit consists of Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska and North and South Dakota.

Copyright Washington Crime News Service Sep 20, 2004
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved