Case List
Anonymous Tips
Blood Test Cases
Chain of Custody v. Confrontation
Knoll Cases
Knoll - Misc
Miscellaneous Cases
Miscellaneous PDFs
Probable Case Cases
Reasonable Suspicion - Alpha
Reasonable Suspicion - Misc
Roadblock Cases
Roadblock - Misc
Search & Seizure Cases
Search & Seizure - Misc
Wreck Cases
Wrecks - Misc
Listings
Reasonable Suspicion - Alphabetized by 1st defendant’s last name:
- State v Adkins &
Eanes, 90 N.C.App. 333 (1988) Weaving and run off road
1 time =
Reasonable Suspicion.
-
U.S. v Arvizu,
122 S.Ct. 744 (2002) - Bad case -
Legal behavior can lead to Reasonable
Suspicion.
-
State v Aubin,
100 N.C.App. 628 (1990) - Bad case - Slow driving and weaving=Reasonable
Suspicion (pre-Wrenn)
-
State v Barnard,
62 N.C. 244, 65 (2008) - Bad case - 30 second
delay at green light = Reasonable Suspicion. (But see State v. Roberson)
-
State v Battle,
109 N.C.App. 367 (1993) - Reasonable
Suspicion
defined.
-
State v Bonds,
139 N.C.App. 627 (2000) - Bad case -
Reasonable Suspicion = equals combo of all factors (here,
window down in cold weather).
-
State v Braxton,
90 N.C.App. 204 (1988) - Furtive
movement does not lead to Reasonable
Suspicion. No authority
to arrest for infraction.
-
Brendlin v CA
551 U.S. 249, 127
S.Ct. 2400 (2007)-R.S. Passenger can
challenge stop.
-
U.S. v Brignoni-Ponce,
422 U.S. 873 (1975) - Reasonable
Suspicion defined:
Mexican not enough.
-
State v Burke, __
N.C.App. ___, 712 S.E.2d 704 (2011) - Affirmed by NC Supreme Court on January 27,
2012. Low number on 30-day tag does NOT =
Reasonable Suspicion. Can’t
guess on Reasonable Suspicion. The officer stopped the vehicle
because the numbers on the 30-day
tag looked low and that the "low" number led
him to "wonder[sic] about the possibility of
the tag being fictitious." The
court noted that it has previously held that
30-day tags that were unreadable, concealed,
obstructed, or illegible, justified stops of
the vehicles involved. Here, although the
officer testified that the 30-day tag was
dirty and worn, he was able to read the tag
without difficulty; the tag was not faded;
the information was clearly visible; and the
information was accurate and proper.
-
Illinois v Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005)
-
Fisher/Falana; dissent good. How long can
you be held after a stop?
-
State v Campbell,
188 N.C.App. 701 (2008) Mere
proximity to crime not enough But here there
was more and thus enough for Reasonable
Suspicion.
-
State v Chlopek,
704 S.E.2d. 563 (2011) - Suspicious
not enough.
-
Webb v Clark, 264
N.C. 474 (1965) - Spinning tires
not equal to careless and reckless.
-
State v Clyburn,
120 N.C.App. 377 (1995) - Search of
auto for carrying concealed weapon,
Reasonable Suspicion
rules. (pre-Gant).
-
State
v Coleman, 743 S.E.2d 62 (2013) Open
container in PVA not R.S.
-
State v Cooper, 186 N.C.App. 100 (2007) - Report that black male committed armed robbery without more did not provide police officer with reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to justify stop and frisk.
- State v Cope, 204 N.C. 28, 167 S.E. 456
-
Simple violation of a traffic regulation which does not involve actual danger to life, limb or property would not perforce constitute the criminal offense reckless driving.
-
State v
Covington, 138 N.C.App. 688 (2000)
- Reasonable Suspicion defined.
- State v Davis, 165 N.C. App. 545 (2004)
Unpublished - Weaving within
1 lane for more than .5 mile, then crossing
the center line, + 10 miles below speed
limit enough for Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Derbyshire, 745 S.E.2d 886
(2013) One weave + bright lights not equal
to R.S.
-
FL v Diaz, 800
So.2d 326 (2001) - Stop based on
mistake not ok.
-
US v Doyle, 650
F.3d 460 (2011) - Evidence excluded
based on search warrant defective as to time
(staleness)
-
State v Falana,
129 N.C.App. 813 (1998) - Once
original purpose of stop is done, need additional
Reasonable Suspicion to continue.
-
State v Fields,
673 S.E.2d 765 (2009) - Weaving is
not enough for Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Fisher,
141 N.C.App. 44 (2000) - After
traffic stop, need Reasonable Suspicion for further
detention.
-
State v Fleming,
106 N.C.App. 165 (1992) Follows
Brown v. Texas. Not a car case.
-
State v Foster, NO. 09-5161 (2010) - NO
Reasonable Suspicion.
-
US
v Fountain Foster, 2011
WL 857785 (2011) - NO Reasonable Suspicion. Panel deeply troubled by Government’s attempts to spin defendant’s “largely mundane acts into a web of deceptions".
-
State v Griffin 589 F.3d 148 (2009)-RS
to stop.
-
State
v Haislip 651 S.E.2d 243 (2007)-When is a checkpoint stop a checkpoint stop? Also-what is a stop?
-
State v Hayes, 88
N.C.App. 313 (2008) - Follows Fleming, this is a car case.
-
State v Heien,
714 S.E.2d 827 (2011) - One brake light is enough. Write of supersedes and review allowed to NC Supreme Court, 1/26/12.
-
State v
Hernandez, 170 N.C.App. 299 (2005) -
Held after stop is ok, but must be short (under 10 minutes). Also, here there was consent to search.
-
State v Hess, 185
N.C.App. 530 (2007) - Driver revoked = Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Hiatt,
184 N.C.App. 190 (2007) - Blue lights= stop. Unpublished
-
State v Hodges,
672 S.E.2d 724 (2009) - Interprets
Falana. Held yes to Reasonable Suspicion here.
-
State v Hopper,
NO. COA09-1211 - Reasonable Suspicion mistake of
fact ok mistake of law not ok.
Unpublished
-
State v Huey, 694
S.E.2d 410 (2010) - Officer must be
sure client resembles criminal.
-
State v Ivey, 360
N.C. 562 (2006) - No turn signal is
not Reasonable Suspicion to stop. (But see St. v. Styles)
-
State v Jacobs,
162 N.C.App. 251 (2004) - Reasonable
Suspicion where
officer observed defendant's car weaving
within its lane of travel for three-quarters
of a mile at 1:43 a.m. in an area near bars.
-
State v Johnson,
204 N.C.App. 259, 264, 693 S.E.2d 711,
714-715 (2010) “Defendant
contends that the trial court committed
error by upholding the warrantless stop of
his car based solely on the information
provided to the police by an anonymous
tipster. We conclude that, while the tip at
issue included identifying details of a
person and car allegedly engaged in illegal
activity, it offered few details of the
alleged crime, no information regarding the
informant's basis of knowledge, and scant
information to predict the future behavior
of the alleged perpetrator. Thus, given the
limited details contained in the tip, and
the failure of the officers to corroborate
the tip's allegations of illegal activity,
the tip lacked sufficient indicia of
reliability to justify the warrantless stop
in this case.
-
State v Jones, 96
N.C.App. 389 (1989) Weaving and
slow driving = Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Jones,
No. 11-4268 - Blocking car=need
Reasonable Suspicion
(=STOP!)
-
State v Knudsen NO.COA12-1475-Open
container in PVA not RS.
-
State v Kochuk 741 S.E.2d 327
(2012)-Fail to maintain lane control not RS.
-
Rowe v Maryland,
363 Md. 424, 769 A.2d 879 (2001)
Driver's momentary crossing of edge line of
roadway and later touching of that line did
not amount to unsafe lane change or unsafe
entry onto the roadway, conduct prohibited
by statute, and did not support traffic
stop. Driver's momentary crossing of edge
line of roadway and later touching of that
line did not rise to level necessary to
justify traffic stop on the ground that it
was community caretaking stop for purposes
of providing assistance.
-
State v Malunda 749 S.E.2d 280 (2013)-PC
to search vehicle not equal to PC to search
passenger.
-
US v Mayo, 361
F.3d 802 (2004) - An encounter
occurring in a high-crime area that was
targeted for special enforcement by police
does not support reasonable suspicion unless
coupled with other suspicious activity.
-
State v
McClendon, 350 N.C. 630, 517 (1999)
- Reasonable Suspicion = nervous and problems with car
ownership.
-
State v McLamb,
186 N.C.App. 124 (2007) Cop’s
mistake as to speed limit gives no Probable
Cause to
stop.
-
State v McRae,
NO.COA09-114 - No turn signal can
be Reasonable Suspicion. Reliable informant tip can supply
Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion.
-
Kansas v Morris,
276 Kan. 11 (2003) - Blue lights
and stop are equal to a seizure, and so need
Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Murray,
192 N.C.App. 684 (2008) - Police
officer lacked Reasonable Suspicion when he
stopped a vehicle to find out why it was
traveling in an area with a history of
break-ins.
-
State v Myles,
654 S.E.2d 752 (2008) Passenger’s
nervousness not enough for Reasonable
Suspicion - Falana
-
State v Otto, 726
S.E.2d 752 (2012) - Weaving + Reasonable
Suspicion
= Bad case.
-
State v Phifer 741 S.E.2d 446
(2013)-Nervous behaviour alone does not
equal RS.
-
State v Rhyne,
124 N.C.App. 84 (1996) - Pat down
not ok.
-
State v Roberson,
240 N.C. 745 (1954) - Skidding +
wreck equals C&R.
-
State v Roberson,
592 S.E.2d 733 (2004) - 6 second
delay at green light is not Reasonable
Suspicion.
-
State v Schiffer,
132 N.C.App. 22 (1999) - Windshield
tinting enough for Reasonable Suspicion. Car search o.k. (Pre-Gant).
-
State v Sellars,
NO.COA11-1315 (2012) - Falana. Not
good-look at how long stop extended.
-
State v Smathers 753 S.E.2d 380
(2014)-No PC for traffic stop needed, with
community caretaking doctrine adopted for
first time by NC Court of Appeals.
A. In this case any alleged community care
taking exception is a pretext for
impermissible criminal investigation.
B. In this case, a search or seizure within
the meaning of the Fourth Amendment has
occurred and under the totality of the
circumstances an objectively reasonable
basis for a community care taking
function is not shown. But if shown, the
public need or interest does not outweigh
the intrusion upon the privacy of the
individual. C. In considering the
applicability of the community care taking
exception, courts must consider the degree
of the public interest and the exigency of
the situation; (2) the attendant
circumstances surrounding the seizure,
including time, location, the degree of
overt authority and force displayed; (3)
whether an automobile is involved; and (4)
the availability, feasibility, and
effectiveness of alternatives to the type of
intrusion actually accomplished, where
danger to life and limb may not be imminent,
but could be prevented by swift action.
-
State v Styles,
362 N.C. 412 (2008) - No turn
signal when changing lanes can be enough to
stop.
-
Terry v Ohio 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct.
(1968)-Probable cause defined.
-
State of Texas v
Tarvin, 972 S.W.2d 910 (1998)
-
Weaving not enough, driving =Controlled
weaving.
-
State v Thompson
& Hardee, 296 N.C.703 (1979) -
Reasonable Suspicion
defined, bad case.
-
State v Verkerk 747 S.E.2d 658
(2013)-Stop by fireman ok here.
-
State v Warren NO. COA02-1693- No blue
lights = no stop. Unpublished
-
State v Watson,
122 N.C.App. 596 (1996) - Reasonable
Suspicion
defined.
-
State v Weaver 752 S.E.2d 240
(2013)-Private security guard does not need
RS.
-
US v Whren and
Brown, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) - Any
objective reason is enough for Reasonable
Suspicion.
-
U.S. v Wilson,
205 F.3d 720 (2000) - Can’t see the
tag not enough for Reasonable Suspicion.
-
State v Young,
148 N.C.App. 462 (2002) - Reasonable
Suspicion is an
objective inquiry; anonymous tip enough
here.
Reasonable Suspicion - Miscellaneous
-
SFST Analysis Form
- Traffic Stops-Article from IOG
- Analysis of legality of running tags without Reasonable Suspicion.
- “Passing and being passed “ from Motor Vehicle Law of North Carolina (not illegal to pass on a double yellow line).
- List of speed and weaving cases.
Anonymous Tips
-
State v Allen, 676
S.E.2d 519 (2009) - In person tip more
reliable. Good law discussion for the State.
-
State v Brown, 142
N.C.App. 332 (2001) - Anonymous tip not
enough-follows Florida v. J.L.
-
State v Coleman, NO.COA12-1173 (2012)
- Not
enough here to stop.
-
State v Cooper, 186
N.C.App. 100 (2007) - Anonymous tip not
enough to stop.
-
State v Crowell,
NO.COA09-635 Unpublished - Not anonymous tip proven if tipster reliable.
-
State v Garcia, 677
S.E.2d 555 (2009) - A less than
reliable anonymous tip may still provide a basis
for reasonable suspicion if supported by
sufficient police corroboration.
-
Harris v Commonwealth of VA, 262 Va. 407 (2001)
-
Anonymous tip not enough
-
State v Harwood, NO.
COA11-1513 - Anonymous Tip not ok.
Seizure when defendant blocked in by officers
(+more)
-
State v Hudgins, 672
S.E.2d 717 (2009) - Anonymous tip, bad
case.
-
State v Hughes, 353
N.C. 200 (2000) - Anonymous tip, good
case.
-
U.S. v Hughes, 517
F.3d 1013 (2008) - Anonymous tip not
enough to pat down.
-
FL v J.L., 529 U.S.
266 (2000) - Anonymous tip rules.
-
State v Maready, 362
N.C. 614 (2008) - Anonymous tip, bad
case.
-
State v McArn, 159
N.C.App. 209 (2003) - Need details of
crime, not just behavior, to get to Reasonable
Suspicion.
-
State v Morton, 346
S.E.2d 437 (2009) - Good case.
Anonymous tip reliability.
-
State v Peele, 675
S.E.2d 682 (2009) - Anonymous tip and
weaving not Reasonable Suspicion.
-
U.S. v Reaves, 512
F.3d 123 (2008) - Anonymous tip alone
not enough.
-
State v Robinson, 148
N.C.App. 462 (2002) - Anonymous tip not
enough, but search ok.
-
State v Sanchez, 147
N.C.App. 619 (2001) - Face-to-face
informant tip reliable.
-
State v Young, 148
N.C.App. 462 (2002) - Reasonable Suspicion is objective,
anonymous tip ok here.
Roadblock Cases
-
State v Barnes,
123 N.C.App. 144 (1996) - No
discretion allowed at checkpoint.
-
State v Bowden,
177 N.C.App. 718 (2006) - A turn
away from a checkpoint roadblock can lead to
RS.
-
State v
Burroughs, 185 N.C.App. 496 (2007) - Upholds
Rose and Edmond.
-
State v Colbert,
146 N.C.App. 506 (2001) - Roadblock
plan ok.
-
State v Collins,
NO. COA11-529 - Turn away from
checkpoint/not a checkpoint stop. Need RS.
-
State v
Corpening, 683 S.E.2d 457 (2009) - Not
a checkpoint stop.
-
Indianapolis v
Edmond, 531 U.S. 32 (2000) -
Roadblock to serve general interest in crime
control violates 4th amendment.
-
State v Foreman,
351 N.C. 627 (2000) - Okay to stop
for u-turn at roadblock if RS. (Here there
was R.S.; no roadblock analysis necessary).
-
State v Gabriel,
192 N.C.App/ 517 (2008) -
Checkpoint rules.
-
State v Griffin
734 S.E.2d 861 (2013) - Three point
turn begins ->RS
-
State v Grooms,
126 N.C.App. 88 (1997) - Every
driver must be treated the same.
-
State v Haislip,
NO.COA06-1488 (2007) - Client cannot
be arrested if pre-arrest test is requested.
-
State v Jarrett,
NO.COA09-1036 (2010) - Roadblock.
Bad Ruling.
-
State v Kincer,
NO.COA09-1639 - Checkpoint-good on
explaining the rules.
-
IL v Lidster, 540
U.S. 419 (2004) - Roadblock to get
information on hit and run ok.
-
State v Mitchell,
358 N.C. 63 (2004) - Defendant’s
not stopping for checkpoint or his “headlong
flight” supplied RS. Roadblock ok for NOL.
-
State v Nolan,
NO.COA10-518 - Roadblock case-this
case ok.
-
Delaware v
Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) - USSC
says roadblocks are ok sometimes.
-
State v Rose, 170
N.C.App. 284 (2005) - Roadblock
needs primary purpose. Multi-purpose
checkpoint is illegal. Must be carefully
tailored to purpose.
-
State v Sanders,
112 N.C.App. 477 (1993) - No
unconstrained discretion allowed.
-
Michigan v Sitz,
496 U.S. 444 (1990) - Roadblock
rules, citing Delaware v. Prouse, 440 US 648
(1979).
-
US v Smith, 396
F.3d 579 (2005) - Defendant’s
evasive behavior regarding roadblock
supports finding of reasonable suspicion for
stop.
-
State v Tarlton,
146 N.C.App. 417 (2001) -
Roadblock-supervisor not necessary, written
not necessary.
-
State v Veazey,
689 S.E.2d 530 (2009) - Bad
checkpoint case. Ruling mostly based on poor
appellate advocacy and trail work.
-
State v Veazey,
191 N.C.App. 181 (2008) - Updates
Rose. Still need primary purpose
and 3 factor ground analysis.
-
STATE v. McDONALD, NO.COA14-893 (2015)
- Roadblock still need Brown analysis (affirms Veazey.)
Roadblock - Miscellaneous
- Order in Robinson Checkpoint not okay.
|