State of Idaho v. Jade Taylor Budd

Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with possession of controlled substance.

Reported by Kent Morlan

An officer and his K-9 partner were near the interstate when the officer observed a vehicle containing two occupants, both with sunken cheek bones. The officer followed the vehicle onto the interstate and observed the vehicle touch the left fog line and fail to signal for five seconds before changing lanes. While attempting to stop the vehicle, the officer observed that the driver was taking longer than normal to completely stop. In addition, the officer witnessed furtive movements by the passenger, where it appeared she dove in front of her seat and then leaned over
the console. These movements caused the officer to believe the occupants of the vehicle may have weapons or contraband.

After the vehicle stopped, the officer approached in front of the right passenger door. Budd, the driver, was identified by his driver’s license. The officer told Budd the reason for the stop and asked him for the vehicle’s registration and proof of insurance. The officer noticed that Budd had glassy eyes, sunken cheekbones, droopy eyelids, and facial tremors. Budd claimed he could not provide the registration and proof of insurance because he had just purchased the vehicle. The
officer also observed a large torch lighter in the driver’s door panel of the vehicle. The officer asked the passenger why she leaned over the console when Budd stopped the vehicle. The passenger indicated that she was attempting to give Budd a hug.

Based on the above circumstances, the officer had both occupants exit the vehicle. The officer stated he was going to have the K-9 perform an open-air sniff. Budd consented to the search but declined the opportunity to roll up the vehicle’s window before the search. As a result,

the K-9 was able to put his head inside the vehicle. As Budd was exiting the vehicle, he informed the officer he had a firearm in the vehicle. The officer searched Budd. Before having Budd and the passenger walk away from the vehicle, the officer received a response from dispatch notifying the officer that Budd’s driver’s license was suspended. When asked if there were drugs and/or paraphernalia in the vehicle, Budd responded that the vehicle was not his.

During the search, the K-9 alerted to the presence of drugs and/or paraphernalia after sniffing the seam between the passenger door and window. The officer placed Budd in handcuffs and another officer arrived at the scene. The original officer searched the vehicle and found a firearm, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia. The officer asked Budd about potential drugs or drug paraphernalia in the vehicle, to which Budd responded that the drugs belonged to the passenger. In addition, Budd informed the officer that there was marijuana and a methamphetamine pipe in the vehicle. Budd later took ownership of the drugs, admitting he asked the passenger to hide the methamphetamine.
The State charged Budd with delivery of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia. Budd filed a motion to suppress, asserting that the officer unlawfully extended the traffic stop and searched the vehicle without reasonable suspicion. In addition, Budd argued the officer’s use of the K-9 constituted an unlawful warrantless search. The district court denied Budd’s motion to suppress, finding that the officer had reasonable suspicion that Budd was driving
under the influence of drugs to justify field sobriety tests. Additionally, the district court held that the officer did not unlawfully extend the stop because he was waiting to verify Budd’s information with dispatch. The district court also concluded the K-9’s alert to potential drugs in the vehicle provided probable cause to search Budd’s vehicle.

Budd entered a conditional guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance
(I.C. § 37-2732(c)) and reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. As part of the plea agreement, the State dismissed the additional charge.

Affirmed