State v. Cunningham

Summary

The Vermont Supreme Court held that police violated Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution by prolonging two traffic stops to conduct canine drug sniffs without a reasonable, articulable suspicion of drug activity. The court reversed the denial of the defendant's motion to suppress and remanded for further proceedings. The opinion did not reach the defendant's additional claims concerning the May 5 exit order and patdown search.

Holdings

1. Under Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution, police may not prolong a routine traffic stop for forty-six minutes to await a canine unit when the totality of the circumstances does not establish a reasonable, articulable suspicion of present drug-related criminal activity.
2. The May 17 detention also violated Article 11 because the anonymous tip, the repeated passage of allegedly suspicious vehicles, and the officer's knowledge of Cunningham's prior drug involvement did not establish reasonable, articulable suspicion of present drug activity.
3. The court did not reach the constitutionality of the canine sniffs, the May 5 exit order, or the May 5 patdown search because the unlawful prolonged detentions independently required suppression.

Questions Presented

1. Whether police unlawfully expanded two routine traffic stops into drug investigations and prolonged Cunningham's detention while awaiting canine units without a reasonable, articulable suspicion of drug-related criminal activity under Chapter I, Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution.
2. Whether the court should decide the constitutionality of the canine sniffs, the May 5 exit order, and the May 5 patdown search.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded