Ex Parte Teddy Lee Knox. (in Re: State of Alabama v. Teddy Lee Knox)

Summary

The court held that the State improperly presented a new legal issue on appeal by arguing for the first time that Knox was not detained when the canine sniff occurred. De novo review of a legal question does not eliminate the requirement that the issue be preserved in the trial court, and the absence of detention was distinct from whether reasonable suspicion existed. The court reversed and remanded for consideration of issues the intermediate appellate court had not reached. Justice Stuart, dissenting, would have treated consent as an alternative reason supporting the legality of the continued encounter, while Justice Shaw concurred in the result but would have adopted an even broader preservation rule.