stating that during the initial lawful checkpoint detention, the officer’s observations of “a strong odor of alcohol in the vehicle and . . . that Defendant’s eyes were red and glassy . . . provided a sufficient basis for reasonable suspicion permitting Trooper Carroll to pursue further investigation and detention of Defendant”
How later courts described this case
- stating that during the initial lawful checkpoint detention, the officer’s observations of “a strong odor of alcohol in the vehicle and . . . that Defendant’s eyes were red and glassy . . . provided a sufficient basis for reasonable suspicion permitting Trooper Carroll to pursue further investigation and detention of Defendant”
- “[The officer] was unaware of any specific problems with unlicensed drivers or motor vehicle law violations at this location.”
- “Both the United States Supreme Court as well as our Courts have suggested that license and registration checkpoints advance an important purpose [.]” (citation and quotation omitted)
- “[P]olice must have individualized suspicion to detain a vehicle for general crime control purposes, and therefore a checkpoint with a primary purpose of general crime control contravenes the Fourth Amendment.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
STEELMAN, Judge,
concurring in the result.
I concur with the holding of the majority remanding this matter for further findings of fact by the trial court.
I am concerned by the' substantial discrepancies between the order dictated by the trial judge in open court and the final written order. It is the duty of the trial judge to ensure that a written order accurately reflects his or her rulings before it is signed, and to modify the order if it is not correct. It is also the duty of counsel preparing the order to ensure that it accurately reflects the trial court’s findings and rulings.