Pubdate: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 Source: Hendersonville Times-News (NC) Copyright: 2004 Hendersonville Newspaper Corporation Contact: http://www.hendersonvillenews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/793 Author: Associated Press APPEALS COURT REVERSES CONVICTION FROM ROCKINGHAM CO. CHECKPOINT The state Court of Appeals threw out a drug possession conviction Tuesday against a motorist in ruling that deputies didn't have the right to walk a drug-sniffing dog around her car at a license checkpoint. Monica Branch was stopped Nov. 3, 2000, by a community policing unit in Rockingham County. Branch presented a duplicate license and a registration to a deputy, who became suspicious and called in her information to check for outstanding warrants. In the meantime, another deputy walked around her car with a dog that alerted officers to the presence of drugs. Deputies then searched her car without her permission and found marijuana stems and butts in the ashtray, according to the court. They found marijuana in her purse and a female deputy later found cocaine inside Branch's clothing. Branch pleaded guilty in 2002 to drug possession and received a suspended term. She appealed, arguing her constitutional rights were violated by an unlawful checkpoint and illegal detention after she had presented a valid license to the deputy. Writing a unanimous opinion for a three-judge appeals panel, Judge Rick Elmore said the checkpoint was designated to check licenses and registrations, and that further evidence of illegal activity could prompt more investigation. Although the deputy who stopped Branch knew that she might be driving with a revoked license, it wasn't enough to justify a dog sniff and search of her car, Elmore said. A reasonable suspicion of drug possession was necessary to conduct the dog sniff and subsequent searches, he said. "Allowing the dog sniff of defendant while she was detained on suspicion of carrying an invalid license would not be consistent with this reasoning," he wrote in reversing the conviction. "The time needed to verify defendant's credentials is not a time during which officers may investigate any possible criminal activity while the defendant is immobilized," Elmore added. - --- MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk