 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Dickerson3/4/1997
Defendant was charged with driving while impaired in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-138.1 (1993) and driving while license revoked in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 20-28 (Cum. Supp. 1996). The district court found defendant guilty, and he appealed to the superior court for trial de novo. Following a hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss, the trial court entered an order in which it made the following findings of fact and Conclusions of law:
1. Officer W. J. Weaver is a sworn State Capital Police Officer.
2. He is employed by the Secretary of the Department of Administration pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-335, et.seq.
3. His oath of office was administered by a person with the authority to administer such oaths.
4. That on October 28, 1994 at about 8:15 p.m., Officer W. J. Weaver was patrolling at about the intersection of Capital Boulevard and Peace Street in the State of North Carolina, County of Wake, City of Raleigh.
5. That at this time, Officer Weaver saw the Defendant Thomas W. Dickerson, driving a motor vehicle and weaving within the roadway.
6. That Officer Weaver had probable cause to stop and did stop the Defendant.
7. That he subsequently charged said Defendant with Driving While Impaired.
8. That the Defendant was not at any time in the arrest process on property that was owned or controlled by the State of North Carolina.
9. That the Court takes judicial notice that Capital Boulevard and Peace Street are streets in and owned by the City of Raleigh.
10. That under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-340, the duties of said officer are specifically limited as set out therein.
11. That it was not within Officer Weaver's jurisdiction to stop the Defendant.
Based upon these findings and Conclusions, the trial court dismissed the charges. The State appeals.
ARNOLD, Chief Judge.
The State argues the trial court erred by dismissing the charges against defendant because the arresting officer had territorial jurisdiction to effectuate the arrest. We agree.
The powers and territorial jurisdiction of State Capitol Police officers are set out in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-340 (1996), which provides in pertinent part as follows:
The Secretary of Administration has the following powers and duties:
(21) To serve as a special police officer and in that capacity to have the same power of arrest as the police officers of the City of Raleigh. Such authority may be exercised within the same territorial jurisdiction as exercised by the police officers of the City of Raleigh, and in addition thereto the authority of a deputy sheriff may be exercised on property owned, leased or maintained by the State located in the County of Wake.
(22) To appoint as special police officers such reliable persons as he may deem necessary, and such officers shall have the same power of arrest as herein conferred upon the Secretary.
The State contends this statute gives State Capitol Police officers the same territorial jurisdiction as that of police officers of the City of Raleigh. Defendant contends, and the trial court concluded, that the statute gives State Capitol Police officers jurisdiction only on State property.
Where the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for judicial construction, and the courts must give it its plain and definite meaning. Utilities Comm. v. Edmisten, Atty. General, 291 N.C. 451, 465, 232 S.E.2d 184, 192 (1977). If, however, the provisions of a statute are ambiguous, a court must construe the statute to ascertai
Page 1 2 3 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|