The Utah Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a Utah County man for possession of a controlled substance found during a routine traffic stop. While the Supreme Court said that the police “violated Mr. Gettling’s Fourth Amendment rights by detaining him after concluding the lawful purpose of a traffic stop,” the Supreme Court upheld the conviction anyway because they found the police officer acted in good faith.

In January 2006, Mr. Gettling was a passenger in the rear seat of an automobile being driven in Utah County that was pulled over for improper lane change and failure to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. The police officer noticed that Mr. Gettling was fidgeting in the back seat. The police officer detained Gettling while a K-9 unit searched the vehicle. The narcotics detection dog indicated the presence of narcotics, and a search of the vehicle found narcotics in Gettlings personal belongings.

The Supreme Court held that the police officer violated Gettling’s rights because the Fourth Amendment allowed the police officer to detain Gettling only long enough to effectuate the purpose of the stop. The Supreme Court said, “We determine that the purpose of the stop concluded after the arrest of the driver. Thereafter, Deputy Radmall had no continued justification to detain the passengers.”

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court decided that the police officer had acted in good faith because at the time of the arrest the search was legal. In 2009 the law changed when the U. S. Supreme Court held that this type of search was unconstitutional. Because the police officer acted in good faith at the time of arrest, the conviction was upheld.