 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Town of Portsmouth v. Hagan4/1/2003
zing the nearby State Police barracks. Accordingly, he suppressed all evidence that was obtained beyond the boundaries of the town.
In quashing the District Court decision, we realign these perceived boundaries of law enforcement authority and the circumstances under which they apply. Because of our holding that respondent remained in the lawful custody of the Portsmouth police, we need not reach the issue of whether, by his consent to the test, Hagan waived the jurisdictional challenge.
Whether sanctioned by statute, as in Ceraso, or by this Court, as in Locke, we consistently have drawn the distinction between an arrest of a suspect that must, both constitutionally and by statute,*fn8 rest upon probable cause, from the circumstance in which a prisoner, already in lawful custody, is taken outside a municipality for legitimate law enforcement purposes. In this case, Hagan had been lawfully arrested, based upon probable cause, and was in the legitimate custody of the Portsmouth police. It was only while acting in accordance with their duty to gather and preserve evidence for use at trial, that the officers drove Hagan to Middletown for a Breathalyzer test. We are thus satisfied that the Portsmouth police acted appropriately and did not relinquish lawful custody of their prisoner at the town line. This conclusion rests upon the distinction between an arrest and seizure of a suspect outside a municipality's borders - an authority that is limited in scope and recognized only in narrowly-defined circumstances - and the extraterritorial transport of a prisoner who is in lawful custody, for the performance of legitimate law enforcement duties, which we sanction today.
This holding is consistent with our previous decisions of Locke, Cioci, and Ceraso. Although well-reasoned, the Superior Court decision in Marran is not binding upon this Court and we decline to follow it. As a matter of public policy, whether an officer's responsibilities include an extraterritorial transport for access to a blood-alcohol testing machine or any other duty in connection with an arrestee who is in lawful custody, we decline to handcuff the state's law enforcement officials in the performance of their legitimate duties. Most notably under the circumstances now before us, in which the officer acted in apparent good faith, upon consent, and in light of the urgency of obtaining blood alcohol evidence before it is metabolized in the blood, we are satisfied that Sullivan acted pursuant to his lawful authority. This decision is well-aligned with other instances of extraterritorial transport of a person in lawful custody, such as travel to court for a bail-setting appearance or for initial appearance after apprehension pursuant to a warrant, or to a medical facility for medical attention as in Cioci.
Although we are cognizant of the strong public interest underlying jurisdictional restraints over law enforcement personnel and are mindful that the Legislature has granted limited authority to an officer to arrest a suspect outside his or her jurisdiction, we acknowledge the practical realities of police investigations into unlawful conduct. A police officer may take a prisoner already in lawful custody to another municipality to carry out legitimate law enforcement duties. However, the limited authority of an officer to make an arrest outside the boundaries of his or her municipality remains unchanged. See State v. Ceraso, 812 A.2d 829 (R.I. 2002).
For the foregoing reasons, the petition for certiorari is granted and the order of the District Court is quashed. The papers in this case are remanded to the District Court with our decision endorsed thereon.
Page 1 2 3 4 Rhode Island DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|