United States of America v. Triston Harris Steinman

Las Vegas, Nevada, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition.



The district court suppressed evidence seized from Triston Harris Steinman's car on multiple grounds, including that a law enforcement officer violated his Fourth Amendment rights during a traffic stop. The Government appeals the suppression order, contending that Steinman's constitutional rights were not violated and that the evidence should not be suppressed.



"A seizure for a traffic violation justifies a police investigation of that violation.” Rodriguez v. United States,

575 U.S. 348, 354 (2015). "Under the Fourth Amendment, a seizure for a traffic stop is 'a relatively brief encounter,'

'more analogous to a so-called Terry stop than to a formal arrest.'” United States v. Taylor, 60 F.4th 1233, 1239 (9th

Cir. 2023) (quoting Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 354). "To be lawful, a traffic stop must be limited in its scope: an officer

may 'address the traffic violation that warranted the stop,' make 'ordinary inquiries incident to the traffic stop,' and

'attend to related safety concerns.'” Id. (quoting Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 354–55). "The stop may last 'no longer than is

necessary to effectuate' these purposes and complete the traffic 'mission' safely.” Id. (quoting Rodriguez, 575 U.S.

at 354–55); see also Rodriguez, 575 U.S. at 354 ("Authority for the seizure . . . ends when tasks tied to the traffic

infraction are—or reasonably should have been completed.”).

Reversed