 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wallace v. State4/14/2004
an assault ... involving this vehicle." He also said that although he had noticed "a couple of traffic violations" while Wallace was stopped at the traffic light, he stopped the vehicle primarily "because there's a report of an assault and I'm investigating that report."
Judge Wood denied the motion to suppress, finding that it was uncontradicted that Trooper Erickson was investigating a report of a possible domestic assault. Judge Wood concluded that Trooper Erickson had reasonable grounds to check on the welfare of the woman passenger because of this report. He also pointed out that it appeared that Trooper Erickson had grounds to stop the vehicle for traffic violations.
Following this ruling, Wallace entered a plea to the felony driving under the influence charge, reserving his right to appeal Judge Wood's denial of his suppression motion.
Discussion
We conclude that Judge Wood did not err in denying Wallace's suppression motion. We determine the legality of an investigative stop under an objective test: "whether the facts known to the officers established a legitimate basis for the stop." Before he stopped Wallace's vehicle, Trooper Erickson had a report from an identified citizen informant that a man and a woman in a vehicle were fighting. The caller provided the color, make, and model of Wallace's vehicle, including the license plate number. Seven minutes after the report Trooper Erickson caught up with Wallace's vehicle at a traffic light. From the report and his observation of the people in the vehicle, Trooper Erickson was concerned about domestic violence. Although Trooper Erickson realized that the Jeep's occupants were not physically fighting when he pulled up behind them at the traffic light, he was still authorized to contact them to investigate the report that they may have been fighting seven minutes earlier.
In addition, based on the ongoing activity he saw when he pulled behind Wallace's Jeep, Trooper Erickson was entitled to conduct a traffic stop. A police officer who observes a traffic offense has the authority to stop and cite (or, for a misdemeanor offense, arrest) the driver for that violation. At the hearing, Trooper Erickson pointed out that while behind Wallace at the traffic light, he saw "a couple of traffic violations." One of these violations was based on Trooper Erickson's observation that Wallace and his wife were engaged in sexual activity while Wallace was driving a motor vehicle.
13 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 02.495(c) provides that " o person may drive a vehicle when he has in his embrace, or holds in his hands, another person ... in a manner [that] prevents the free and unhampered operation of the vehicle." As described by Trooper Erickson, while stopped at the traffic light, Wallace "got up and leaned over on top of the female passenger," who was facing him with her legs spread. He was then sufficiently preoccupied that when the traffic light changed from red to green, he delayed responding for a few seconds. Because Trooper Erickson had probable cause to believe that Wallace had violated AAC 02.495(c), a traffic stop was justified.
We conclude that Judge Wood did not err in finding that Trooper Erickson's stop of Wallace's car was lawful and in denying Wallace's motion to suppress.
Conclusion
The decisions of the superior court are AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|