Driving along the Nebraska State Highway just after midnight, Dennys Rodriguez briefly swerved onto the highway shoulder, which is a violation of Nebraska law. At 12:06 a.m., Officer Morgan Struble pulled Rodriguez over for erratic driving. Struble questioned both Rodriguez and his passenger and ran a records check on the car registration and their drivers’ licenses. Struble gave Rodriguez a warning ticket.

At 12:27 a.m., Struble finished explaining the warning to Rodriguez and returned the documents to the two men. He then asked permission to walk his police dog around Rodriguez’s vehicle, but Rodriguez said no. On the officer’s instructions, Rodriguez exited the vehicle. At 12:33 a.m., Struble led the dog twice around the SUV. During the second circuit, the dog signaled the presence of drugs. After searching the car, Struble found methamphetamine, an illegal drug. 

At trial, Rodriguez argued that the dog sniff was illegal because Struble had effectively conducted a stop and frisk after the traffic stop was over. But Struble did not have a clear and specific reason to suspect criminal activity for a legal stop and frisk. Both the trial court and the appellate court disagreed with Rodriguez. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. 

Questions:

1. Was the dog sniff legal?

2. What are some ordinary inquiries incident to a traffic stop?

3. Is it legally permissible for an officer to make unrelated inquiries pursuant to a traffic stop?

4. Was the officer in reasonable fear for his safety?