The Wyoming Supreme Court came out with a fairly important case. In recent years, the court has been construing the state constitution to give broader protections for defendants than the Fourth Amendment. Article I, Sec. 4 of the Wyoming Constitution is similar to the Fourth Amendment, but as the U.S. Supreme court has scaled back protections, the Wyoming Supreme Court has taken an independent look at Wyoming's version. The analysis is a bit different, and defendents seem to be generally more protected.
In Fertig v. State, the court looked at whether a pretextual, otherwise-valid traffic stop was unreasonable under the state constitution. The facts were nice and clean: the police got an anonymous tip about a drug operation, surveyed the house, then kept an eye on the defendant's driving looking for an excuse to pull him over and hoping to find drugs. The officers were completely candid and flat-out said at the suppression hearing that they were just looking for a valid reason to pull the defendant over to find drugs.
I won't get into the reasoning here, but basically, the court adopted prior U.S. Supreme Court reasoning that the officer's subjective motivation is not relevant to determining whether a traffic stop is valid.
