Friday, January 23, 2009

No reasonable suspicion for car stop

Shawna Miller (now Jackson County CA) won in State v. Ramos, No. 99,544 (Kan. App. Jan. 16, 2009)(unpublished), affirming Judge Ireland's suppression order on Fourth Amendment grounds. The case involved whether there was reasonable suspicion to stop a car:
In its brief, the State argues that there was reasonable suspicion to support Besenyi's decision to pull the car over. Specifically, the State notes that Besenyi received information that the owner of the residence, where the car had pulled into the driveway, had reported receiving threats that tribal property, which was stored on his property, would be stolen in the future. In addition, the owner had complained about people pulling into his driveway and using drugs. The owner asked police to check on cars that pulled in and out of his driveway during late evening hours. Because Besenyi saw the car's driver (which did not belong to the owner of the residence) pull into the driveway and then back out, the State argues that this gave Besenyi reasonable suspicion to pull the driver of the car over and investigate whether the occupants of the car were involved in a possible burglary or using drugs.
. . . .
The problem with this argument is that the actions taken by the driver negated any reasonable suspicion Besenyi may have had that pointed to the occupants of the car being involved in drug use or a possible burglary of the residence. The car's driver pulled into the entryway of the driveway and stopped; the driver did not drive up to the house. Then, a minute later, the driver backed out of the driveway and continued driving east, the direction the driver had been traveling before pulling into the driveway. Simply stated, the car's driver did not stay parked in the driveway long enough to create any sort of reasonable suspicion that the occupants were preparing to burglarize the residence or stopped in the driveway so they could use illegal drugs. Because such a brief moment of time passed between the driver pulling into the driveway and backing out, Besenyi was not justified in thinking that the occupants of the car were committing, had committed, or were about to commit the crimes of burglary or illegal drug use.
[Update: the state did not file a PR and the mandate issued on February 19, 2009].

No comments: