State v. Harris

Decision Date15 September 1989
Docket NumberNo. 87-219,87-219
Citation568 A.2d 360,152 Vt. 507
PartiesSTATE of Vermont v. Bruce A. HARRIS.
CourtVermont Supreme Court

William D. Wright, Bennington County State's Atty., and Adele V. Pastor, Law Clerk (on the brief), Bennington, for plaintiff-appellant.

Walter M. Morris, Jr., Defender General, and William A. Nelson, Appellate Defender, Montpelier, for defendant-appellee.

Before ALLEN, C.J., PECK, DOOLEY and MORSE, JJ., and SPRINGER, District Judge (Ret.), Specially Assigned.

MORSE, Justice.

The State appeals the trial court's dismissal of the information charging defendant with hindering a police officer, 13 V.S.A. § 3001, for lack of a prima facie case. The sole issue is whether defendant's flushing cocaine down a toilet to avoid being "busted" during a police raid violates § 3001. We hold it does not and affirm.

Section 3001 states:

A person who hinders [a] ... law enforcement ... officer acting under the authority of this state ... shall be imprisoned not more than three years or fined not more than $500.00, or both.

For purposes of the motion, the facts are viewed in a light most favorable to the State. State v. Norton, 147 Vt. 223, 229, 514 A.2d 1053, 1058 (1986). On November 18, 1986, seven police officers executed a search warrant for illegal drugs at defendant's residence. Defendant saw them arrive and flushed cocaine down a toilet before an officer apprehended him in the bathroom. Cocaine residue was found on the toilet rim. Defendant admitted flushing the cocaine so that he "wouldn't get busted."

The State, citing cases from other jurisdictions construing criminal statutes dealing with destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice, argues that actions taken to deprive the state of evidence of a crime with the intent to escape prosecution are covered by § 3001. While there is a superficial appeal to the argument that "hindering" under the statute covers this situation, we do not give the statute such a broad sweep.

This Court has stated:

We regard the test as being one of whether or not the respondent has a legal right to take the action which results in impeding the officer. If he does have that right, its exercise is not prohibited by the statute. Only when he has no such right can his actions be an unlawful hindrance.

State v. Buck, 139 Vt. 310, 313, 428 A.2d 1090, 1093 (1981). A person "hinders" an officer when the person's actions illegally interfere with the officer's ability to perform duties within the scope of the officer's authority. The term does not cover actions which interfere only with the ultimate purpose of the officer's actions, that is, a successful prosecution. In contrast, had the defendant restrained a police officer attempting to seize cocaine as an accomplice flushed it down a toilet, the statute would come into play.

If the statute is not given a narrow reading, it will be unconstitutionally vague. A criminal law must inform the public with reasonable assurance what behavior is forbidden. If a statute is so vague that persons of ordinary intelligence do not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • State v. Blanchard
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • March 5, 2021
    ...without violence or threats, the defendant was merely dealing with his own property as he had a right to do"); see also State v. Harris, 152 Vt. 507, 509, 568 A.2d 360, 361 (1989) (affirming dismissal of information charging defendant with impeding conviction based on defendant's flushing c......
  • State v. DeLaBruere, 86-128
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • April 27, 1990
    ...639, 641 (1989). See also State v. Parenteau, 153 Vt. 123, ----, 569 A.2d 477, 478 (1989) (quoting Cantrell ); State v. Harris, 152 Vt. 507, ----, 568 A.2d 360, 361 (1989) (statute is vague if persons of ordinary intelligence do not know what conduct violates its terms). The prohibition of ......
  • State v. Blanchard
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • March 5, 2021
    ...without violence or threats, the defendant was merely dealing with his own property as he had a right to do"); see also State v. Harris, 152 Vt. 507, 509, 568 A.2d 360, 361 (1989) (affirming dismissal of information charging defendant with impeding conviction based on defendant's flushing c......
  • State v. Berard, 2018-180
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Vermont
    • September 27, 2019
    ...with the officer's ability to perform duties within the scope of the officer's authority." State v. Harris, 152Page 4 Vt. 507, 509, 568 A.2d 360, 361 (1989); see also State v. Stone, 170 Vt. 496, 499, 756 A.2d 785, 788 (2000) ("We have defined 'hinder' as 'to slow down or to make more diffi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT