In a case out of Dallas, the Texas Appellate Court reviewed a case where following the defendant's refusal of consent to a vehicle search, the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant pending a dog sniff, given the officer's observations of two air fresheners and a can of Febreeze and the defendant's body language indicating, the officer's view, deceptions. "When the officer returned to where the defendant was standing and asked for consent to search the vehicle, the defendant turned and looked at his vehicle and turned back and 'kind of hesitated' before refusing consent to search.
As the defendant hesitated, the officer saw his face begin to twitch, and after refusing consent, the defendant shuffled his feet and walked back and forth with his arms crossed, indicating he was being deceptive." Also, the defendant told the officer, he "had been in trouble before in some other stuff" but did not elaborate and told the officer he could "look it up."
The defendant's constitution rights were challenged on appeal as being violated, so that the evidence of the drugs could potentially be ruled as inadmissable and the case dismissed.