apply here. In Place, the court held that exposing an individual's luggage located in a public place to a dog sniff did not constitute a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. Id. at 707, 103 S.Ct. 2637. Nevertheless, in applying Article II, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution, we have ruled that Colorado law affords broader protections in some instances than the Fourth Amendment. See People v. Oates, 698 P.2d 811, 815 (Colo.1985)("Several times we have determined that the Colorado proscription against unreasonable searches and seizures protects a greater range of privacy interests than does its federal counterpart."); People v. - Sporleder, - 666 P.2d 135, 140 (Colo.1983)("Although Article II, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution is substantially similar to its federal (Colo.1995)(<HOLDING>). An individual must have a reasonable
holding that if an agent does not develop reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before the justifying purpose of a checkpoint stop has been accomplished he may not prolong the stop holding that an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct traffic stop even when his suspicion that a law has been violated is based on a reasonable mistake of law holding that circumstances created reasonable suspicion for investigatory stop holding that reasonable suspicion is required to prolong a traffic stop after the purpose for which the investigatory stop was instituted has been accomplished holding that a traffic stop which lasted 105 minutes from the time of the initial stop until the defendant was arrested on drugrelated charges was unreasonable because the officers lacked reasonable suspicion to prolong the stop for purposes of conducting a drug dog sniff because there was insufficient evidence that the defendant was engaged in drugrelated activity