United States v. Hunter, No. 10-3266 (10th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant-Appellant Damon Hunter appealed the denial of his motion to suppress evidence gathered from a vehicle in which he was traveling. In 2009, a Kansas Highway Patrol trooper pulled Defendant over pursuant to a "TOPS" initiative in which troopers would watch for highway safety issues through a semi-trailer truck equipped with cameras. The trooper explained to the occupants of the vehicle, with Defendant (in the passenger seat) and Alice Isaacson (the car driver), that he had pulled them over for driving too closely behind the semi. Further investigation would reveal that the car Defendant was riding in was a rental with an expired contract, and that Defendant intended, but neglected to extend the rental period. The trooper asked Defendant whether there was anything illegal in the car, but Defendant and Ms. Isaacson exchanged looks and said nothing. The trooper then asked whether he could search the car. Ms. Isaacson handed the keys to the trooper, and he searched the car. Ultimately the car was impounded because police found thirty-five pounds of marijuana, a kilogram of cocaine and a weapon inside. Defendant was indicted on possession and intent-to-distribute drugs charges, as well as firearms charges. Defendant unsuccessfully moved to suppress the evidence found in the car, and later entered a conditional guilty plea for which he was sentenced to 60 months' imprisonment. On appeal, Defendant argued the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress on multiple grounds, notably that (1) the trooper lacked reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle for following too closely; (2) Defendant's detention was impermissibly prolonged and not reasonably related to the justification for the stop; and (3) Ms. Isaacson did not have authority, apparent or otherwise, to give consent to search the car. Upon review of the trial court record and the applicable legal authority, the Tenth Circuit "easily" concluded that the district court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.