 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hart3/27/2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Carlynn D. Grupp, Judge.
Kevin Al Hart appeals from his convictions for driving while barred and possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) following bench trial. AFFIRMED.
Kevin Al Hart appeals from his convictions for driving while barred and possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine) following bench trial. He contends the court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We affirm.
I. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
Kevin Al Hart was stopped by Iowa State Trooper Ryan Moore on September 6, 2000 at approximately 10:45 p.m. while he was driving his vehicle northbound on Highway 65, a four-lane highway. Trooper Moore testified at the suppression hearing that Hart's vehicle first came to his attention when it crossed the dividing line into the other lane and then corrected back. Moore stated he then activated his in-car video camera and followed Hart for approximately another quarter mile. Because Hart continued to weave within his own lane Trooper Moore stopped the vehicle. After the stop Moore proceeded to search the vehicle as well as Hart and his passenger. Hart was arrested and charged with operating while intoxicated (second offense), in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.2 (1999), driving while barred, in violation of Iowa Code section 321.561, and possession of a controlled substance (methamphetamine), in violation of Iowa Code sections 124.401(5) and 124.206(4)(b).
Hart filed a motion to suppress alleging the stop was without probable cause and no reasonable grounds existed for the officer to believe criminal activity was taking place. Therefore, he argued the subsequent warrantless search violated both his federal and state constitutional rights. The trial court held a hearing on Hart's motion. Trooper Moore testified for the State and Hart testified on his own behalf. The district court denied the motion to suppress, finding Hart's driving was "sufficiently unusual to justify the officer's reasonable belief that criminal activity may be afoot."
Hart waived jury trial. The parties stipulated that the court take judicial notice of the minutes of evidence, and that if called the witnesses would testify as set forth in the minutes. By agreement the court also received and considered the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation's laboratory report and Hart's driving record. The driving while intoxicated charge was dismissed. The district court found Hart guilty as charged on Count IV (driving while barred) and Count V (possession of methamphetamine) and sentenced him to fifteen days in jail on each count, to run concurrently. Hart appeals from his convictions, contending the court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the officer did not have sufficiently specific and articulable cause to reasonably believe criminal activity was afoot in order to justify the investigatory stop.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees a person's right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. We review this constitutional question de novo in light of the totality of the circumstances as shown by the record. State v. Turner, 630 N.W.2d 601, 606 (Iowa 2001). "We give deference to the district court's fact findings due to its opportunity to assess the credibility of witnesses, but we are not bound by those findings." Id. The adverse ruling on Hart's motion to suppress preserved error for our review. State v. Breuer, 577 N.W.2d 41, 44 (Iowa 1998).
III. MERITS
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: The right of the people t
Page 1 2 Iowa DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|