SBI SEMINARS DUI BOOT CAMP

1
SBI SEMINARSDUI BOOT CAMP

• TRAFFIC STOPS
• The Stop, Detention, Investigation, and Arrest of
  a Motorist and/or Passenger

2
Basic Facts

• All DUI cases start with the seizure of the
  defendant
• All seizures are governed by the Fourth
  Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
• All DUI cases involve the Fourth Amendment plus
  some aspect of traffic law
• All DUI cases involve some kind of forensic
  evidence

3
What Does the Defense Lawyer Need to Know?

• Fourth Amendment law
• Alabama Traffic Code
• Understanding of blood and breath analysis as
  reported by the Alabama Department of Forensic
  Science (DFS)

4
Basic Sources/Materials

• Search Seizure, 3rd Ed. by John Wesley Hall,
  Lexis Pub. Co. (Updated annually)
• Michies Alabama Motor Vehicle Laws Annotated w/
  commentaries ,Lexis Pub. Co. (Annual publication)
• Alabama DUI, Traffic, and Driver License Law
  Handbook, 3rd Edition by Mahaney Farmer
  (Updated annually)

5
TERRY v. Ohio

• The starting point for any traffic stop inquiry
  is analysis of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)
• The Terry rule a police seizure does not
  automatically result in custodial arrest to
  implicate the 4th Amendment , but any police
  seizure must be reasonable under Constitutional
  analysis
• Terry created two levels for a lawful police
  seizure
• probable cause to arrest
• reasonable suspicion to stop question

6
Alabama Statutory Authority

• Code of Alabama, 1975, section 15-5-30 authorizes
  a law enforcement officer to stop and question
  any person the officer reasonably suspects is
  in the process of committing a crime.
• Code of Alabama, 1975, section 15-5-31 authorizes
  a law enforcement officer to search for a weapon
  if the officer reasonably believes the person is
  armed.
• This Code section does not authorize the
  routine, suspicion less pat down or frisk of
  every person the police encounter what is
  commonly termed pat-down for officer safety.

7
Was the Traffic Stop a Seizure?

• The starting point to any police-citizen
  encounter is to determine if a seizure
  occurred.
• A seizure takes place only when a reasonable
  person would believe that he was not free to
  leave.
• Any show of force by the police is construed to
  be a seizure.
• Use of blue lights and siren
• Use of voice command or hand signal

8
Objective Test

• The leading Supreme Court case interpreting
  traffic stops is Whren v. U.S. (1996)
• In Whren, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the
  subjective standard and applied the objective
  test a traffic stop is valid if the officer
  reasonably believes a violation has taken place,
  and the officers subjective intent is
  irrelevant.
• Whren is an extension of the Terry doctrine.

9
Reasonable Suspicion Required

• Foundational case Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S.
  648 (1979) Traffic stop of a moving vehicle
  constitutes a seizure which must be based on
  reasonable suspicion.
• Any bona fide violation of the traffic code
  constitutes reasonable suspicion.
• Exception to general rule Roadblocks conducted
  in a neutral and objective manner

10
Mistaken Opinion of Law Does Not Authorize Valid
Traffic Stop

• United States v. Chanthasouxat, 342 F. 3d 1271
  (11th Cir. 2003) Police officers mistaken
  impression of law cannot justify a lawful stop of
  a vehicle.
• Officers mistaken belief that an inside mounted
  rearview mirror was required to operate a vehicle
  held invalid for a lawful traffic stop.
• Under Alabama law, police officers are presumed
  to know the law that they are enforcing no
  deference is afforded to the officers mistaken
  belief of law.

11
Anonymous Tips and Anonymous Informants in
General

• Alabama v. White (U.S. 1990) police officers
  corroboration of the details of the anonymous tip
  provided sufficient reasonable suspicion to
  justify a Terry stop subsequent consent to
  search valid.
• Florida v. J.L.(U.S. 2000) An anonymous tip that
  a person is carrying a gun, without any further
  information provided, is insufficient to justify
  a stop and frisk.
• W.D.H. v. State (Ala. Cr. App. 2008) Police stop
  and frisk of a person located in area of shooting
  and drug sales, without any indication that
  person had committed an offense, insufficient
  that defendant was engaged in criminal activity.
  See extensive opinion by Judge Welch on the law
  of stop and frisk

12
Anonymous Tips The DUI Exception

• Cottrell v. State (Ala. Cr. App. 2007) In a case
  of first impression, the Court of Criminal
  Appeals held an anonymous tip of DUI driver
  sufficiently reliable under Terry for traffic
  stop without independent corroboration by the
  police.
• Virginia v. Harris cert. denied Oct. 20, 2009
  U.S. Supreme Court failed to grant cert to
  states petition to reverse Virginias decision
  to suppress the traffic stop made of suspected
  DUI driver based on anonymous tip.
• Note According to C.J. Roberts dissent, the
  majority of states have adopted an anonymous
  tip-DUI exception while a minority of states
  have refused to create such exception.

13
Vehicle Stop Anonymous Tips

• Ex parte Aaron (Ala. 2005) an anonymous tip,
  without intervening police investigation to
  determine the reliability or accuracy of
  information, held insufficient to support a Terry
  stop.
• Ex parte Shaver (Ala. 2004) same facts -
  extensive opinion by Justice Lyons on law of
  anonymous tips and authority to conduct Terry
  stop.
• State v. Strickland (Ala. Cr. App.2005)
  telephone tip, identity confirmed, police
  corroborated information prior to stop traffic
  stop held valid under Terry principles.

14
Vehicle Stop- Suspected Criminal Activity

• State v. Green (Ala. Cr. App.2008) where robbery
  took place minutes before the traffic stop, and
  distance from robbery location to stop was two to
  three miles, and the police dispatch was
  generally consistent with vehicle stopped, the
  Court held the facts were minimally sufficient
  to justify stop. See extensive dissenting
  opinion by Judge Welch.

15
Police Questioning of a Stopped Car

• Ex parte Betterton (Ala. 1988) Police officers
  approach to already parked car does not require
  reasonable suspicion or probable cause, but
  without reasonable suspicion, cannot order
  persons out of the car.
• State v. Brodereck (Ala. Cr. App. 1989) Lawfully
  parked car not subject to investigation without
  particularized basis to suspect criminal
  activity.

16
High Crime Area Stops

• Gaskins v. State (Ala. Cr. App. 1990) Being in a
  high crime area insufficient basis by itself to
  justify Terry stop must have particularized
  basis to suspect criminal activity.
• Sibron v. New York (U.S. 1968) Deliberate
  furtive actions, flight from law enforcement, and
  specific knowledge on part of law enforcement are
  proper factors to be considered in evaluating
  lawfulness of stop.

17
Reasonable Suspicion to Stop Specific Criminal
Offense or Violation- Held Valid

• No tag displayed and no operable tag light
• No headlights at night
• Improper lane usage
• Speeding running stop sign
• Erratic vehicle operation
• Failure to stop for blue lights
• Information provided by another officer
• Radio report one officer to second officer
• Collective knowledge
• High speed operation
• Avoid stopping/turning around at roadblock
• Parked in roadway

18
Detaining Motorists Length and Scope of
Detention

• State v. Hale (Ala. Cr. App. 2008) Once the
  traffic ticket or warning is issued and documents
  returned to driver, the motorist is released from
  detention. Officers request to search is a
  consent to search and motorists agreement to
  search is examined under the reasonable person
  free to leave standard.
• Length of detention
• 28 minutes to summon drug dog, after motorist
  exhibited high degree of nervous behavior held
  valid State v. McPherson (Ala. Cr. App. 2004)
• Prolonged detention after motorist signs UTTC
  based on hearsay from second officer held
  invalid Smith v. State (Ala. Cr. App. 2006)

19
Federal Cases Lawfulness of Traffic Stop
Detention and Scope

• U.S. v. 511, 780 (M.D. Ala. 1994) Implausible
  story by driver and passenger concerning route
  and purpose of trip inconsistent statements,
  etc. held sufficient to create probable cause to
  search.
• Same indicators Improbable story or inconsistent
  statements false or deceptive information
  provided to officer all held to create situation
  to allow detention by officer, to include use of
  drug dog
• U.S. v. Gonzalez (M.D. Ala. 2008)
• U.S. v. Hernandez (M.D. Ala. 2005)
• U.S. v. Ramirez (11th Cir. 2007)
• U.S. v. Viezca (M.D. Ala. 2008)

20
U.S. Supreme Court Cases Detention of Motorist
Control over Motorist and Passengers

• Maryland v. Wilson (1997) A police officer may
  without probable cause order passenger(s) out of
  lawfully stopped vehicle pending completion of
  traffic stop.
• Brendlin v. California (2007) When a police
  officer makes a traffic stop, the passenger is
  seized as well as the driver. The passenger is
  entitled to challenge the stop under 4th
  Amendment grounds.
• Arizona v. Johnson (2009) Officers pat-down of
  a passenger for weapon justified under Terry
  principles if legal basis existed to stop and
  pat-down driver, same principles extend to
  passenger.
• Arizona v. Gant (2009) Search incident to
  arrest exception greatly limited search of
  passenger compartment of vehicle authorized only
  if 1) arrestee is within reaching distance of
  passenger compartment (Chimel wing-span test)
  or 2) reasonable to believe vehicle contains
  evidence of the offense.
• Note Gantt decision greatly limits and restricts
  New York v. Belton which had upheld police
  searches of passenger compartments as incident
  to lawful arrest.

21
Roadblocks

• Michigan Dept. State Police v. Sitz (1990)
  Police roadblocks not invalid under the U.S.
  Constitution if stop is brief and minimal
  detention all motorists are stopped (or some
  other neutral method) and conducted under
  established guidelines to minimize officer
  discretion.
• Ex parte Jackson (Ala. 2004) Adopting Cains
  standard Roadblock conducted consistent with
  neutral operational plan, under supervision of
  police supervisors, with primary purpose to
  enforce traffic law, held valid. Subsequent
  seizure of controlled substances valid.

22
Roadblocks

• Cains v. State (Ala. Cr. App. 1989) Cains is the
  foundational case to determine lawfulness of a
  police roadblock under Alabama law. Police
  roadblocks are not per se invalid, but must be
  conducted under neutral and objective standards,
  with the primary purpose being traffic
  enforcement, and only minimally intrusive to the
  motorist.
• Hagood v. Town of Town Creek (Ala. Cr. App 1993)
  Where police roadblock was used for general law
  enforcement, with no written guidelines or
  restrictions on officers procedures, and without
  any safety measures, such police roadblock
  violated the Cains standards and 4th Amendment.
• State v. White (Ala. Cr. App. 2009) Defendants
  turning around at driver license checkpoint, then
  heading in opposite direction, provided officer
  with reasonable suspicion to conduct
  investigatory stop.

23
END OF PRESENTATION

• WHAT ARE YOUR QUESTIONS?