details provided by complainant coupled with officer's verification justified stop
How later courts described this case
- details provided by complainant coupled with officer's verification justified stop
- content of a communication evidence of information available to the officer at the time of the stop
- defendant's evasive action as officer approached vehicle and 3 information provided by off-duty officer justified stop
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT
KENNEBEC, ss CRINIINAL ACTION
DOCKET
, ,.
NO. CR~9-~78
'1 /-,
/1/
~
- '<' ~ !) - lp d / i 0 I 0
• - ' r
c/
STATE OF MAINE
v. ORDER ON MOTION
TO SUPPRESS
ROBERT EMERSON,
Defendant
The defendant seeks to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the stop of the
vehicle operated by the defendant on 12/3/09. The defendant argues that the officer
lacked any specific and articulable facts to justify the stop. For the following reasons,
the motion is denied.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Augusta Police Department Officer Matthew Estes graduated from the Maine
Criminal Justice Academy in December 2008. He was working the 2:30 p.m. to 12:30
a.m. shift on 12/3/09. He was in uniform and operating a marked cruiser.
At approximately 10:30 p.m. he received information from dispatch. He heard
that a white Jaguar traveling southbound on 1-95 from Sidney was being operated
erratically, was swerving, and almost struck another vehicle. The information that the
Jaguar almost struck another vehicle was not included in Officer Estes's report and he
did not include that in his testimony at the administrative hearing at the DMV. He did
receive the information from dispatch.
Augusta Police Department Officer Nicolas Hample graduated from the Maine
Criminal Justice Academy in December 2007. He also heard the dispatch information
regarding the Jaguar. He heard that a white Jaguar traveling southbound on 1-95
almost struck a motor vehicle and was all over the road. The information that the
Jaguar was all over the road was not included in Officer Hample's report. His report
provided that a "possibly impaired driver almost struck another vehicle while traveling
southbound on Interstate 95." The information was called in to dispatch by Jessica
Verreault, who was operating a vehicle behind the white Jaguar.
Officer Estes responded and parked in a U-turn area on 1-95. He observed the
white Jaguar, not a commonly seen car, traveling southbound. Officer Estes pulled out
behind the Jaguar and the vehicle following the Jaguar. He observed the brake lights of
the second vehicle flashing. He interpreted that as meaning the operator of that car
wanted the officer to know that she had called in the information about the Jaguar. The
second car slowed and Officer Estes pulled in behind the Jaguar. He followed the
Jaguar for four miles and observed the Jaguar traveling at fluctuating speeds from 50 to
65 m.p.h. Officer Estes observed no other erratic operation during the four-mile drive.
The Jaguar exited 1-95 at the Winthrop exit. Based on the information provided
by Ms. Verreault and his observations regarding the speed of the Jaguar, Officer Estes
activated his blue lights and siren to stop the Jaguar. The operator of the Jaguar, the
defendant, reacted immediately and pulled into a parking lot appropriately.
CONCLUSIONS
In order to justify a brief investigatory stop, "a police officer must have an
articulable suspicion that criminal conduct or a civil violation has occurred, is occurring,
or is about to occur, and the officer's suspicion must be 'objectively reasonable in the
totality of the circumstances. "' State v. Brown, 1997 ME 90, C[ 5, 694 A.2d 453, 455
(quoting State v. Cusack, 649 A.2d 16, 18 (Me. 1994)). "An investigatory stop is valid
when it is 'supported by specific and articulable facts which, taken as a whole and
together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant the police
intrusion.'" See State v. Taylor, 1997 ME 81, <.IT 9, 694 A.2d 907, 909 (quoting State v. Hill,
2
606 A.2d 793, 795 (Me. 1992)). "The reasonable suspicion standard requires less than
probable cause that a crime was being committed, but more than speculation or an
unsubstantiated hunch." State v. Sampson, 669 A.2d 1326, 1328 (Me. 1996) (quoting
State v. Caron, 534 A.2d 978, 979 (Me. 1987)). "The facts supporting an investigatory
search need not be based on the officer's personal observations, but can be provided by
an informant if the information carries sufficient 'indicia of reliability.'" State v.
Cushing, 602 A.2d 1169, 1170 (Me. 1992); see also State v. Burgess, 2001 ME 117, <JI 9, 776
A.2d 1223, 1227.
The defendant argues that the information provided by Ms. Verreault cannot be
determined because of the omissions in the officers' reports and DMV testimony. These
officers are relatively new to law enforcement. They testified credibly. Including every
word and observation in a report is a best practice. But the court is satisfied that Ms.
Verreault told dispatch that the Jaguar was being operated erratically and almost struck
another vehicle. She then indicated to the officer following her that she was the person
who had called in the information about the car in front of her and slowed to allow the
officer to pull in behind the Jaguar. Her information and conduct provide sufficient
indicia of reliability to justify Officer Estes's stop of the Jaguar when the officer found
the Jaguar being operated in the location and direction provided by Ms. Verreault.
State v. Vaughan, 2009 ME 63, <JI<JI 2, 7, 974 A.2d 930, 931-32 (reasonable suspicion based
on a tip corroborated by the vehicle's location); Burgess, 2001 ME 117, <JI 11, 776 A.2d at
1228 (details provided by complainant coupled with officer's verification justified stop);
State v. Littlefield, 677 A.2d lOSS, 1058 (Me. 1996) (officer observed a vehicle matching
the description and traveling in the same direction and on the road described in the
anonymous tip and defendant's immediate turn into a driveway justified stop);
Cushing, 602 A.2d at 1170 (defendant's evasive action as officer approached vehicle and
3
information provided by off-duty officer justified stop); State v. Poole, 551 A.2d 108, 110
(Me. 1988) (content of a communication evidence of information available to the officer
at the time of the stop).
The entry is
The Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
Date: June 23, 2010
Nancy Mills
Justice, Superior C
4
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT
vs KENNEBEC, ss.
ROBERT A EMERSON Docket No AUGSC-CR-2009-00978
80 POPLAR STREET
BANGOR ME 04401 DOCKET RECORD
DOB: 04/18/1950
Attorney: LEONARD SHARON State's Attorney: EVERT FOWLE
LEONARD SHARON ESQ PC
223 MAIN STREET
AUBURN ME 04210-5833
RETAINED 12/18/2009
Filing Document: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Major Case Type: FELONY (CLASS A,B,C)
Filing Date: 12/04/2009
Charge(s)
1 OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE-2 PRIORS 12/03/2009 AUGUSTA
Seq 11519 29-A 2411 (l-A) (B) (2) Class C
ESTES / AUG
Docket Events:
12/04/2009 FILING DOCUMENT - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 12/04/2009
12/04/2009 Charge(s): 1
HEAR~NG - INITIAL APPEARANCE SCHEDULE OTHER COURT ON 12/04/2009 @ 1:00
AUGDC
12/07/2009 BAIL BOND - $500.00 CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 12/07/2009
Bail Receipt Type: CR
Bail Amt: $500
Receipt Type: CK
Date Bailed: 12/04/2009 Prvdr Name: JOSEPH EMERSON
Rtrn Name: JOSEPH EMERSON
12/07/2009 Charge (s): 1
HEARING - INITIAL APPEARANCE HELD ON 12/04/2009
12/07/2009 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 01/26/2010 @ 10:30
12/07/2009 Charge(s): 1
PLEA - NO ANSWER ENTERED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/04/2009
12/07/2009 BAIL BOND - CASH BAIL BOND SET BY COURT ON 12/04/2009
ROBERT E MULLEN , JUDGE
12/18/2009 Party(s): ROBERT A EMERSON
ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 12/18/2009
Attorney: LEONARD SHARON
01/27/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE HELD ON 01/26/2010
Page 1 of 3 Printed on: 06/23/2010
ROBERT A EMERSON
AUGSC-CR-2009-00978
DOCKET RECORD
DONALD H MARDEN , JUSTICE
Reporter: TAMMY DROUIN
Defendant Present in Court
01/27/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 03/23/2010 @ 10:00
01/27/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE NOTICE SENT ON 01/27/2010
02/17/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE NOT HELD ON 02/17/2010
02/17/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 03/23/2010 @ 8:30
02/17/2010 Charge(s): 1
SUPPLEMENTAL FILING - INDICTMENT FILED ON 02/11/2010
02/17/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT NOTICE SENT ON 02/17/2010
03/23/2010 Charge(s): 1
HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT HELD ON 03/23/2010
JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE
DA: BRAD GRANT
READING WAIVED. DEFENDANT INFORMED OF CHARGES. COPY OF INDICTMENT/INFORMATION GIVEN TO
DEFENDANT. 21 DAYS TO FILE MOTIONS ER
03/23/2010 Charge(s): 1
PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY DEFENDANT ON 03/23/2010
03/23/2010 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL SCHEDULED FOR 06/07/2010
03/23/2010 BAIL BOND - CASH BAIL BOND CONTINUED AS POSTED ON 03/23/2010
JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE
Date Bailed: 12/04/2009
04/01/2010 Charge(s): 1
MOTION - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/01/2010
04/01/2010 Charge(s): 1
MOTION - MOTION IN LIMINE FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/01/2010
04/01/2010 Charge(s): 1
MOTION - OTHER MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/01/2010
MOTION FOR A REPORT
04/01/2010 Charge(s): 1
MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/01/2010
04/01/2010 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS SCHEDULED FOR 06/09/2010 @ 1:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
04/01/2010 HEARING - OTHER MOTION SCHEDULED FOR 06/09/2010 @ 1:30
Page 2 of 3 Printed on: 06/23/2010
ROBERT A EMERSON
AUGSC-CR-2009-00978
DOCKET RECORD
MOTION FOR A REPORT
04/01/2010 HEARING - MOTION IN LIMINE SCHEDULED FOR 06/09/2010
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
04/01/2010 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SCHEDULED FOR 06/09/2010 @ 1:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
05/05/2010 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL NOT HELD ON 05/05/2010
05/06/2010 HEARING - MOTION IN LIMINE NOT HELD ON 05/06/2010
06/08/2010 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY CONTINUED ON 06/08/2010
06/08/2010 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SCHEDULED FOR 06/10/2010 @ 8:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
06/08/2010 HEARING - OTHER MOTION CONTINUED ON 06/08/2010
MOTION FOR A REPORT
06/08/2010 HEARING - OTHER MOTION SCHEDULED FOR 06/10/2010 @ 8:30
MOTION FOR REPORT
06/08/2010 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS CONTINUED ON 06/08/2010
06/08/2010 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS SCHEDULED FOR 06/10/2010 @ 8:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
06/10/2010 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS HELD ON 06/10/2010
NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE
Attorney: LEONARD SHARON
DA: BRAD GRANT
Defendant Present in Court
TAPE#1329, INDEX#3363-4907
06/10/2010 Charge (s): 1
MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS UNDER ADVISEMENT ON 06/10/2010
NANCY MILLS I JUSTICE
06/10/2010 Charge(s): 1
TRIAL - DOCKET CALL SCHEDULED FOR 07/07/2010 @ 1:15
06/23/2010 Charge(s): 1
MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS DENIED ON 06/23/2010'
NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE
COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
A TRUE COPY
ATTEST:
Clerk
Page 3 of 3 Printed on: 06/23/2010