 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Jacobs10/6/2004
On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, a hearing was held in this Court on Defendant's Oral Motion to Suppress ("the Motion"). [FN1] The limited articulated basis for the Motion by Defendant was the limited seizure of Defendant on the date, time and place set forth in the Information was unlawful. This is the Court's Final Decision and Order on Defendant's Motion. For the following reason the Court finds there was no reasonable articulable suspicion to stop the Defendant's motor vehicle on the date, time and place charged in the Information filed with the Clerk of the Court and therefore GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Suppress. [FN2]
FN1. Although the Defendant did not file a written Motion within ten (10) days of arraignment pursuant to Court of Common Pleas Criminal Rule 12(b)(3), the State took "no position" and the Motion was heard by consent.
FN2. Defendant was charged by Information files with the Clerk of the Court by the Attorney General with two (2) counts, a violation of 21 Del. C. § 4177(a) and one count 21 Del. C. § 4347(e)
THE FACTS
Delaware State Police Trooper Scott D. Slover ("Slover") presented testimony at trial. He has been employed by Troop 2 for the past 1 1/2 years and has been previously employed as a Delaware State Trooper for approximately 6 years. On October 14, 2003 he was serving in the Patrol Unit. Slover has completed the 40 hour DUI Detection Course at the Delaware State Police Academy and has a Bachelor's Degree in Accounting. He also has 40 hours of class work at the Delaware State Police. On the date charged in the Information October 14, 2003 at approximately midnight, he was performing traffic control and DUI detection on Delaware Route 7 in New Castle County, Delaware. Stover was in a fully marked Delaware State Police patrol vehicle and his attention was drawn to Defendant's motor vehicle in the area of Route 40 eastbound, west of Route 7. Slover identified the Defendant's motor vehicle as a Red Ford F150 Pick-up.
Slover noticed the Defendant's vehicle in the left turning lane for Route 7 northbound and proceeded directly behind the Defendant's motor vehicle. The light at Route 7 was red but then turned green and the Defendant's motor vehicle traveled through the intersection with a green arrow. Slover noticed no brake lights when the Defendant went through the intersection and observed the Defendant's motor vehicle traveling approximately 10 mph. The turning lane was approximately 200 feet in length.
Slover also did not see a left turn signal on Defendant's motor vehicle but agreed at trial that there was a green arrow to go northbound on Route 7. The Ford F150 driven by the defendant proceeded through the intersection with the green left turn arrow.
The Defendant then proceed on Route 7 and Slover then activated his emergency equipment and pulled the Defendant over. Slover proceeded to follow the Defendant for approximately one quarter of a mile. The weather was clear, dry with no wind. Slover indicated that he smelled the odor of alcohol on the defendant.
On cross-examination Slover indicated his attention was drawn to Defendant's Ford F150 pick-up truck, but does not recall when he first observed Defendant's truck or when it allegedly passed him, or even what direction it came from.
Slover indicated that there was nothing in his Police Report regarding the Defendant's brake lights not working or whether Defendant's turn signal was working. Both factual basis for the stop, which Slover testified at trial are absent in the Police Report prepared by Slover as the factual basis for stopping the Defendants Ford F150 pick-up truck.
*2 Slover also indicated that Defendant did not commit any motor vehicle violation such as swerving in or outside the marked roadway lanes. Slover
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Delaware DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|