August 5, 2025
“Traffic stops are the most common point of police-initiated contact between civilians and law enforcement…. But for many Marylanders of color, particularly Black Marylanders, these encounters are fraught with the threat of escalation and harm.” To illuminate the impact of this practice, the Public Justice Center, Baltimore Action Legal Team, Maryland Criminal Defense Attorneys’ Association, and Professor Michael Pinard filed an amicus brief in Rogers v. State of Maryland in May. The case concerns the constitutionality of a prolonged traffic stop, and the brief supports the Office of the Public Defender’s petition for the Supreme Court of Maryland to grant review.
Mr. Rogers, a Black man, was stopped for speeding as he exited the highway into Hagerstown. Although the officer stated he would be issuing a warning, he delayed the stop to wait for backup so that he could search the car with a drug-sniffing dog (called a K-9 scan). The justification for further investigation was based on so-called “criminal indicators” including lack of quality eye contact, a large bottle of cologne in the center console, the fact that Mr. Rogers was driving from Baltimore, a one-day car rental, and the absence of visible DJ equipment in the backseat of the car (Mr. Rogers is a DJ and was enroute to a gig).
As part of his defense, Mr. Rogers moved to suppress the evidence obtained during the stop, arguing that the officer unlawfully prolonged the detention beyond its original purpose. Although the stop was initiated for speeding, the officer delayed issuing the warning and instead waited for backup to arrive in order to conduct a K-9 scan based on subjective factors that did not constitute reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activity. The trial court denied the motion to suppress, and the Appellate Court of Maryland affirmed, concluding that the officer had not improperly extended the stop. In doing so, the court disregarded the officer’s deviation from the stop’s original objective and the absence of legal justification for the delay.
Written by PJC Murnaghan Fellow Sahar Atassi, the amicus brief discusses how pretextual stops, like the one at issue in this case, are frequently racialized and inflict disproportionate harm on drivers of color. Black drivers are 20% more likely to be stopped by police and nearly twice as likely to be searched, despite carrying contraband less frequently. Drawing on research regarding discretionary policing, racial bias, and the impacts of these encounters, the brief argues that cases like Mr. Rogers’s should not be viewed in isolation but in light of a well-documented systemic pattern. We hope that the Supreme Court of Maryland will take the case and make clear that a traffic stop may not be extended into a criminal investigation without reasonable, articulable suspicion grounded in facts, not stereotypes.
Thank you to Office and Operations Manager Sabrina Harris for assisting with the brief.
