Page 54 - TPA Journal May - June 2018

Court has noted that it would be unreasonable to weapons on his person; the need to discover
require police officers to take unnecessary risks in weapons did not disappear once the person
performing their duties and that traffic stops are removed the obvious weapon.
especially fraught with danger to police officers.
See Maryland v. Wilson, 519 U.S. 408, 414-15 Similarly here, Salinas was conducting the stop
(1997) (noting that danger to an officer is likely alone at night. Not only was he alone, but Salinas
to be greater when there are passengers in addition was outnumbered by Appellant and the two other
to the driver stopped in the car[,] and holding that adult occupants of the vehicle. Although Appellant
an officer making a traffic stop may order admitted to having a pocket knife before the pat-
passengers to get out of the car pending down, this did not alleviate the potential threat of
completion of the stop.). additional weapons. Additionally, Salinas had
observed Appellant moving around and reaching
We find this case analogous to OHara v. State. In into his pockets while he was in the vehicle. This
OHara, we noted that an officer may not case presents facts which mirror those in OHara
conduct a pat-down search as a matter of and provides additional factors which increase the
routine, as Salinas testified he did in this case. likelihood of danger.
However, we also recognized that objective
facts can justify a pat-down even when the Although Salinas testified that he conducted the
officer conducts a pat-down as part of a stated pat-down out of routine, Salinass subjective
routine. In OHara, Trooper Muhler stopped thought processes do not control. We find that a
OHara, a truck driver, for malfunctioning reasonable officer in Salinass situation would be
clearance lights on his truck at 3:30 a.m. Muhler justified in fearing for his safety and thus
conducted his standard safety inspection of the conducting a pat-down search for weapons.
truck. Muhler noticed OHara was wearing a belt
knife, but allowed him to wear it during the 2. Salinas did not unduly prolong the detention.
inspection. After the inspection, Muhler told Next, we address whether Salinas unlawfully
OHara to get his paperwork and that they would prolonged the traffic stop. The United States
go to Muhler s patrol car for Muhler to write the Supreme Court recently discussed unduly
report. Muhler asked OHara 46 to leave the belt prolonged traffic stops in Rodriguez v. United
knife in the truck, which he did. Muhler told States. In Rodriguez, Officer Morgan Struble
OHara he would let OHara sit in the patrol car, pulled Rodriguez over for driving on the highway
but he needed to pat him down for weapons first. shoulder, a violation of Nebraska law. Struble
Muhler testified that this was his standard approached the vehicle and advised Rodriguez
procedure. When Muhler patted OHara down, he why he was pulled over. Struble ran a computer
found marijuana. He arrested OHara and later check on Rodriguez, then separately conducted a
found cocaine. computer check on the passenger. Struble also
questioned the passenger about where the men
In finding that Muhler had reasonable suspicion to were coming from and where they were going.
conduct a patdown, we noted three specific After running both computer checks and
facts:(1) Muhler was conducting the stop alone, determining that neither man had outstanding
(2) it was the middle of the night, and (3) OHara warrants, Struble issued a written warning. The
had previously been wearing a knife. The fact that written warning was issued twenty-one minutes
OHara removed the belt knife prior to the pat- after the officer initially pulled the vehicle over.
down did not diminish the reasonableness of the After the warning was issued and Struble returned
search because he could have possessed additional the documents to Rodriguez and the passenger,

50 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • 866-997-8282 Texas Police Journal