In legislative practice, many cases may require special attention. Hence, one such case is the case of Rodriguez v. the United States of America. It affects, at first glance, the ordinary case of a citizen being stopped by a policeman, but it has several nuances. This scientific work aims to present a brief description of the proceedings of Rodriguez v. the United States of America and primarily focuses on the legality of stops, detention, and recovery of drugs.
First of all, it is necessary to gain an understanding of what the case studied in this article is. Officer Struble stopped Citizen Rodriguez for riding on the shoulder of the highway. This action is a violation of the laws of the state of Nebraska, which immediately responds to the justification of the legality of the actions of a representative of the police force (“Rodrigues v. United States,” 2014). The officer checked all the available documents of the driver and passengers, justified the reason for the stop, and issued a fine for traffic violations. In addition, after carrying out this procedure, the man tried to get permission from Rodriguez to examine the car for the presence of narcotic substances with the help of a dog. The officer refused this request, however, after the arrival of the second policeman, Struble began the examination. As a result, the dog showed the presence of narcotic substances, which turned out to be methamphetamine, banned in the United States of America. The use of this narcotic substance is allowed only in some instances, such as the treatment of ADHD and obesity, but it is mainly used as a recreational drug.
Therefore, the driver was charged with drug trafficking according to American legislation. This was also because, during the search, the accused hid all possible evidence that had been seized by representatives of the law. The illegality of the police’s measures was assumed to be that they extended the stop without reasonable suspicion. This was introduced as a petition in court, but the judge rejected it due to no substantiated evidence.
The unreasonableness of the actions of the representatives of the legislation consists of too long a stop and an unreasonable search. However, this was done due to the issuance of a fine for violating traffic rules and checking a driver’s license. Moreover, it was necessary to accurately verify unpaid warrants, as well as car registration and insurance confirmation. These procedures are mandatory when setting up citizens for a violation on the road and simply ensuring the safety and use of vehicles. At the same time, the dog’s sniffing of Rodriguez’s vehicle can be called unfairly qualified by the actions of the officer.
The main problem, in this case, is the disregard for the rules of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This rule bans unreasonable examination, search, and detention. In addition, an eight-minute delay could be considered an attempt at Rodriguez’s freedom. Nevertheless, the court rejected this protest and considered the actions of the officers acceptable concerning this case. Eventually, Rodriguez was charged with the possession and distribution of narcotic substances. The man pleaded guilty to the act and was sentenced to five years in prison.
Reference
Rodrigues v. United States. (2014). Legal Information Institute. Web.