detention of the van, its driver, and its passenger exceeded the valid reason for the initial stop and violated the Fourth Amendment. The subsequent search of the vehicle was an unconstitutional search, and the drugs and drug paraphernaha discovered were fruit of the poisonous tree. The trial court’s denial of appellants’ motions to suppress should have been granted. In light of this holding, we need not address the third point, that omissions of facts in Ramsey’s affidavit for search warrant undermined the drug dog’s reliability and amounted to a Franks violation; or the fourth point, that the search warrant was objectively unreasonable and that there was no basis for a nighttime search. Reversed and remanded. Hart, Robbins, and Neal, JJ. te, 84 Md. App. 243, 578 A.2d 816 (1990) (<HOLDING>). In this case, after Ramsey determined that
holding that coming from the wrong neighborhood does not give rise to reasonable suspicion holding innocent facts when considered together can give rise to reasonable suspicion holding that the fact that defendant granted consent to police to search some items and then refused to give consent to additional searches cannot support a finding of reasonable suspicion holding the drivers refusal to consent to search of automobile did not give rise to reasonable suspicion that vehicle contained narcotics holding that refusal to consent to search cannot support a finding of reasonable suspicion