" Weaver v. State , 357 Ga. App. 488, 491, 851 S.E.2d 125 (2020). See also Gonzales v. State , 255 Ga. App. 149, 150, 564 S.E.2d 552 (2002) ("nervousness alone is not sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to detain and investigate for illicit drug activity"). Based on the totality of the circumstances — including the arrival of backup, the timing of being asked to exit the vehicle, the pat-down, and not being told that he was free to leave despite the conclusion of the traffic stop — a reasonable person would not have understood that he was free to leave at the time that Young inquired about illegal items in the vehicle and requested consent to search Hill's vehicle.
See, e.g., Sommese, 299 Ga. App. at 670 (1) (c) (rejecting appellant's claim that traffic stop was unreasonably prolonged by officer waiting for back-up when officer was otherwise engaged in other tasks and had not yet completed citation paperwork when back-up arrived); Bowens, 276 Ga. App. at 521-22, n. 3 (upholding as reasonable free-air search of vehicle conducted while officer awaited results of license check); Byers, 272 Ga. App. at 665-66 (concluding that free-air search conducted while officer was writing traffic citation was lawful and did not expand the scope of the stop). Compare State v. Thompson, 256 Ga. App. 188, 189-90 ( 569 SE2d 254) (2002) (excluding evidence obtained as a result of officer's continued questioning of defendant after citation had been written and license returned defendant, resulting in a 20-minute delay while waiting for drug dog after traffic stop had concluded); Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002) (holding that officer went beyond permissible scope of investigation when he questioned defendants after traffic stop had ended but lacked reasonable suspicion to do so).Judgment affirmed.
(Footnote omitted.) Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002). And an air freshener is a legal substance that, standing alone, is insufficient to justify further detention.
Testimony that a passenger was breathing hard with a pounding pulse, however, does not establish a reasonable suspicion that he poses a danger to the officer's safety. See Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002) (nervousness alone insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to detain and investigate for illicit drug activity). And in this case, the officer did not even testify that these signs made him fear for his safety or suspect Molina might be dangerous, only that they gave him "a little bit of a heightened state of awareness."
But the evidence showed that he was not detained after the conclusion of the traffic stop. Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002). Approximately four minutes after the officer stopped Becoats, he went back to his car to check Becoats's driver's license.
The only other factor cited to support Adkins' detention was her extreme nervousness, but it is well settled that nervousness alone is not enough to justify a detention or search. See Bell v. State, 295 Ga. App. 607 ( 672 SE2d 675) (2009); Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002). Moreover, police observations of Adkins' nervousness arose directly from the illegal stop.
Id. See Bell v. State, 295 Ga. App. 607 ( 672 SE2d 675) (2009); Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002) (nervousness alone is not sufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to detain and investigate for illicit drug activity).Salmeron, 280 Ga. at 736 (1); Matthews, 294 Ga. App. at 838 (2) (a); Hayes, 292 Ga. App. at 730-731 (2) (e).
Accordingly, we conclude that the officers impermissibly exceeded the scope of the initial traffic stop when, due to suspicions raised by Bell's nervousness, they detained Bell and Winkler to await the arrival of the K-9 unit from another county The search of the vehicle was conducted after Bell and Winkler were illegally detained and was therefore unjustified. See Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002). See State v. Habib, 260 Ga. App. 229, 231 (1) ( 581 SE2d 576) (2003).
Robinson is correct that Georgia courts have held as a matter of law that nervousness alone is not enough to create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002); State v. Kwiatkowski, 238 Ga. App. 390, 393 ( 519 SE2d 43) (1999). But Garrett testified that Reeves's behavior went beyond mere nervousness in dealing with police to behavior that raised the suspicion that she was under the influence of an intoxicant.
Wilson v. State, 293 Ga. App. 136, 138 ( 666 SE2d 573) (2008). Many cases evaluate whether the presence of certain elements constitutes enough evidence to create a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity that permits further inquiry. Regarding the elements of nervousness, cell phones, and air freshener, nervousness alone is not enough, Gonzales v. State, 255 Ga. App. 149, 150 ( 564 SE2d 552) (2002), nor are nervousness and meaningless inconsistencies. Migliore v. State, 240 Ga. App. 783, 786 ( 525 SE2d 166) (1999); Simmons v. State, 223 Ga. App. 781, 782 (2) ( 479 SE2d 123) (1996).