State v. Bibbins

Because the majority’s opinion effectively overrules established *101precedent without so stating43 and ignores the Supreme Court’s decision in Daniel v. State,44 I respectfully dissent.

This case revolves around Stephen Ralph Bibbins’ alleged consent to the search of his vehicle during a traffic stop. Recently, our Supreme Court set forth a framework for analyzing the validity of such consent. First addressing the limits of a traffic stop, the Court in Daniel v. State noted that

[t]he officer’s purpose in an ordinary traffic stop is to enforce the laws of the roadway, and ordinarily to investigate…