286. Although Deputy Young testified at the suppression hearing that Appellant was absolutely free to go, it is clear that this encounter had become non-consensual. After the citation was issued to the driver, the deputies requested Appellant’s name and date of birth multiple times and repeatedly told him that this has to be resolved before he could leave. Several minutes after the completion of the traffic stop, the deputy continued questioning Appellant and Appellant responded, “The problem is you’re questioning someone who is not even driving a car and just sitting here and she got her ticket and there shouldn’t be any other problem here.” We agree. We cannot conclude that the State has established the reasonableness of the detention required by this Court in Kothe. 152 S.W.3d at 67 (<HOLDING>). At the time the driver was issued the warning
holding that an officers diligent pursuit of an investigation during the detention is a factor in determining the reasonableness of an investigatory stop holding that the constitutional reasonableness of a traffic stop did not depend on the actual motivation of the officer involved as long as the officer articulated a lawful reason for the stop holding that determination of whether a detention is too long to be justified as an investigative stop must take into consideration whether the police diligently pursued their investigation during the time it was necessary to detain defendant holding that police may briefly detain individuals for further investigation during a traffic stop as long as they can establish the reasonableness of the detention holding that twentysevenminute detention for dwi investigation after traffic stop was not unreasonable