Defense says officer's lookup of no-contact order during stop extended seizure and violated Fourth Amendment

Edward Wicksler, counsel for Mr. Schiff and a lawyer with the Washington Appellate Project, told the Court of Appeals that the State's request would expand police authority beyond settled limits. "The State is asking this court to exercise its extraordinary power of discretionary review to revive a misdemeanor prosecution, and it's asking this court to do so to advance a theory of warrant checks that would dramatically expand the scope of police's civil enforcement authority beyond well settled constitutional limits," Wicksler said.

Wicksler emphasized Rodriguez v. U.S. as the controlling limit on records checks during traffic stops: an officer may not take steps that measurably extend the duration of a stop to conduct an independent criminal investigation unrelated to traffic enforcement. He told the court that Ranger Oakley's decision to look up details of the no-contact order while the stop was ongoing converted a legitimate records check into an impermissible investigatory detour. "The constitutional violation occurred at the moment that Ranger Oakley took it upon himself to look up the details of this no contact order," Wicksler argued, pointing to the suppression ruling below and to the trial record on what dispatch reported.

The judge tested that position with hypotheticals — for example, whether an officer who writes a citation and then, from his vehicle, briefly checks dispatch before re-engaging the driver would violate the Fourth Amendment. Wicksler said such a scenario would be problematic if the officer paused or diverted time from traffic duties in a manner that prolonged the seizure without independent reasonable suspicion.

Wicksler concluded by asking the court to deny review and let the superior court's suppression ruling stand; the court took the matter under advisement and recessed.