Traffic Stops & Small Talk: Third Circuit Says Rolex Question Didn’t Violate Rodriguez

Scott Courrege
Aug 24
2 min read

United States v. Ross, 23-1631 (3d Cir. Aug. 19, 2025)

Summary

Holding: Officer’s brief watch-and-job comment during traffic stop did not unlawfully prolong the stop under Rodriguez.

Importance: Clarifies boundaries of permissible “small talk” vs. investigative questioning during stops.

Limits: Court stressed context matters—employment questions may be unlawful if prolonged, repetitive, or investigative in nature.

Facts

Officers in South Philadelphia stopped Ross for illegal window tint. He appeared extremely nervous, moved a jacket oddly, and gave inconsistent statements about his license. Officer Smart complimented Ross’s Rolex and asked where he worked (he replied: home health aide business). Officers ran records, learned of a prior gun arrest, called backup, and eventually found a gun and 136 packets of fentanyl/heroin in the car. Ross moved to suppress, claiming the job question unlawfully extended the stop. District Court denied; Ross appealed.

Issues

Did the officer’s “watch-and-job” question unlawfully extend the stop under Rodriguez v. United States?
Was suppression required for the firearm and drugs found as a result?

Holding

The Third Circuit affirmed. The watch-and-job exchange fell within safety-related dialogue and did not unlawfully prolong the stop. Evidence was admissible.

Reasoning

Rodriguez Framework: Stops must be limited to infraction-processing and safety, unless independent suspicion arises. Even brief off-mission questions can violate if they prolong the stop.
Four Categories of Questions:
- Small talk (permissible)
- Infraction-related (permissible)
- Safety-related (permissible)
- Off-mission criminal investigations (impermissible absent reasonable suspicion)
Application: Ross showed extreme nervousness and abnormal movements—objective safety concerns. Officer’s Rolex compliment and job inquiry reasonably fit as rapport-building/safety-calming measures, not investigatory fishing. Brief (seconds), no repetitive follow-up, and no delay.
Takeaway: Context matters—what may appear investigatory can be safety-related if aimed at diffusing tension and not prolonging the stop.

Street Takeaways

Officers may use brief rapport-building questions (like compliments or job queries) if tied to officer safety.
Nervousness, evasive behavior, and odd movements justify safety-focused dialogue.
Employment questions become problematic if prolonged, repeated, or clearly investigatory.
Courts emphasize totality of circumstances—short, non-intrusive exchanges rarely trigger Rodriguez violations.