 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Lafond7/31/2002
cted their search," and all the police had to use was "the bare report of an unknown, unaccountable informant" who did not explain how he gained knowledge of the gun or that he had "inside information" about J.L. Id. at 271. Concededly,
n accurate description of a subject's readily observable location and appearance is of course reliable in this limited sense: It will help the police correctly identify the person who the tipster means to accuse. Such a tip, however, does not show that the tipster has knowledge of concealed criminal activity. The reasonable suspicion here at issue requires that a tip be reliable in its assertion of illegality, not just its tendency to identify a determinate person. Id. at 272.
Our jurisprudence authorizes the use of anonymous tips in drunk driving cases when the tipster is inferentially reliable, see State v. Sampson, 669 A.2d 1326, 1328 (Me. 1996) (the tip inferentially identified a Dunkin' Donuts employee as the informant, and the tip contained "specific information which included a description of Sampson's car, its location, the direction in which it was heading, and the license plate number"), or when the officer personally observed the driver drinking earlier in the evening, State v. Fortin, 632 A.2d 437, 438 (Me. 1993).
We also sanction reliance on an anonymous tip when there is subsequent corroboration. In State v. Littlefield, 677 A.2d 1055, 1056 (Me. 1996), the police received a call that a 1979 blue Chevy pickup truck with Maine registration 28230Z was travelling on Route 9 towards Brewer and that the truck "was Ôall over the road.'" The officer followed the truck for one tenth of a mile and did not notice any unusual driving; however, the truck put on its blinker and turned into a driveway that did not reflect the address in the registration. Id. at 1057. The defendant argued that the mere fact the tip contained concrete statements of time and place as well as a specific description of the truck was not sufficient to justify the stop. Id. at 1057. We recognized, however, that elements of the tip were immediately and independently corroborated. See id. at 1058. Additionally, the officer had "a reasonable basis for believing that the truck did not belong in that driveway." Id. Thus, the "totality of the circumstances" supplied the "indicia of reliability" to render the stop constitutional. Id.
Citing State v. Caron, 534 A.2d 978, 979 (Me. 1987), Lafond contends his "drift to the right" does not provide the necessary independent corroboration of intoxication. We disagree. The single straddle observed in Caron, which we held "did not give rise to an objectively reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was involved," id., is not this case. Here we have a straddle plus an anonymous tip with sufficient specificity that the vehicle could be located.
The entry is: Judgment affirmed.
Page 1 2 3 Maine DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|