## Facts

- A Nashville police detective stopped Harvey Everett III’s vehicle for speeding after observing it traveling at a high rate of speed.
- The detective was assigned to an aggressive patrol unit focused on stops in high-crime areas.
- During the traffic stop, the detective asked Everett questions unrelated to the speeding violation.
- In responding, Everett volunteered that a shotgun was in the car.
- Officers discovered the shotgun, and Everett (a felon) was charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- Everett moved to suppress the shotgun, arguing the unrelated questioning lacked independent reasonable suspicion and unlawfully extended the stop.
- The district court denied suppression, and Everett was convicted.

## Issues

1. Whether an officer may ask questions unrelated to the traffic violation, without independent reasonable suspicion, when the questioning prolongs a lawful traffic stop by at least a small amount.
2. Whether the shotgun should be suppressed as the product of an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress and affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the traffic stop was valid at its inception based on speeding.
- The court held the officer’s unrelated questioning did not violate the Fourth Amendment under the totality of the circumstances.
- The court concluded any incremental extension attributable to the questioning did not render the overall detention unreasonable.
- Because there was no Fourth Amendment violation, Everett’s volunteered statement and the firearm discovery were admissible.

## Legal Principles

- During a lawful traffic stop, officers may engage in “mere questioning,” including on topics unrelated to the traffic violation, without converting the encounter into an unconstitutional seizure.
- The Fourth Amendment inquiry focuses on whether the stop, viewed as a whole, is reasonable in scope and duration.
- Unrelated questioning that causes only a slight extension of a lawful stop may be permissible if the overall detention remains reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.
- Evidence obtained following lawful questioning during a valid stop is not subject to suppression absent an independent Fourth Amendment violation.

## Conclusion

A lawful traffic stop is not rendered unconstitutional simply because an officer asks brief, unrelated questions that add a small amount of time; suppression is unwarranted when the overall detention remains reasonable and the defendant’s disclosure leading to the evidence occurs during that valid stop.


United States v. Everett, 601 F.3d 484 (6th Cir. 2010)