State v. Mantia

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT, PARISH OF LAFOURCHE PER CURIAM: L Rehearing granted for the limited purpose of clarifying that the open-air canine sniff of the exterior of the vehicle in this matter comported -with Rodriguez v. United States, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 1609 , 191 L.Ed.2d 492 (2015), because it was-conducted during a lawful traffic stop and not within a timeframe exceeding that reasonably necessary to conclude the matter for which the officer initiated the stop. See also Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405, 409 , 125 S.Ct. 834, 838 , 160 L.Ed.2d 842 (2005) (where lawful traffic stop was not extended beyond time necessary to issue warning ticket and conduct ordinary inquiries incident to such a stop, another officer’s arrival while stop was in progress and use of a narcotics-detection canine to sniff the exterior of the subject vehicle did not infringe on Fourth Amendment' rights). Moreover, the officer here was justified in performing an open-air canine sniff of the vehicle’s exterior once the officer observed defendant (a passenger in the vehicle) surreptitiously attempt to conceal a bag inside the passenger compartment which was within view from outside the vehicle. Cf. United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 707 , 103 S.Ct. 2637, 2644-45 , 77 L.Ed.2d 110 (1983) (external sniff of vehicle by narcotics canine not a search | ¿under Fourth Amendment). Under these circumstances, the trial court abused its discretion when it granted the motion to suppress the contraband discovered as a result of the canine alerting during the sniff search.