Henderson v. State, 2003-KA-00879-COA.
| Decision Date | 13 July 2004 |
| Docket Number | No. 2003-KA-00879-COA.,2003-KA-00879-COA. |
| Citation | 878 So.2d 246 |
| Parties | Efrem HENDERSON, Appellant v. STATE of Mississippi, Appellee. |
| Court | Mississippi Court of Appeals |
Edmund J. Phillips, attorney for appellant.
Office of the Attorney General by Scott Stuart, attorney for appellee.
Before SOUTHWICK, P.J., MYERS and CHANDLER, JJ.
SOUTHWICK, P.J., for the Court.
¶ 1. A Neshoba County Circuit Court jury convicted Efrem Henderson of possession of cocaine. On appeal, he argues that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the results of a search and in sentencing him as an habitual offender. We find no error and affirm. ¶ 2. During the early morning hours of January 17, 2002, a police officer noticed Efrem Henderson driving his vehicle erratically. The officer stated that Henderson almost hit a curb, stopped at a stop sign, then proceeded through the intersection and almost hit another curb. The officer stopped Henderson. After approaching the vehicle, the officer smelled alcohol. The officer stated that Henderson's speech was slurred and his eyes were red and glassy. After conducting a field sobriety test and a pat down search, the officer took Henderson to jail.
¶ 3. At the jail, an Intoxilizer test revealed that Henderson had a blood alcohol content above the legal limit for driving. Henderson was then placed under arrest and a strip search was made. The officer found cocaine wrapped inside clear plastic wrap.
¶ 4. Henderson was convicted of possession of cocaine and sentenced as an habitual offender to sixteen years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. He appeals.
DISCUSSION
¶ 5. Henderson claims that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the results of the strip search. He states that pulling a car toward the curb without hitting it on a traffic-free street is not careless driving and did not constitute probable cause to be stopped. He claims that because there was no probable cause for the stop, the evidence from the subsequent search was inadmissible.
¶ 6. The offense that Henderson allegedly was committing when he was stopped was this:
Any person who drives any vehicle in a careless or imprudent manner, without due regard for the width, grade, curves, corner, traffic and use of the streets and highways and all other attendant circumstances is guilty of careless driving. Careless driving shall be considered a lesser offense than reckless driving.
Miss.Code Ann. § 63-3-1213 (Rev.1996).
¶ 7. As a general rule, "the decision to stop an automobile is reasonable where the police have probable cause to believe that a traffic violation has occurred." Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806, 810, 116 S.Ct. 1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996). The officer witnessed the vehicle that Henderson was driving approach the curb twice. This indicates that Henderson was driving without due regard for the width and use of the street. The officer's observations were enough for him to determine that careless driving had taken place.
¶ 8. Further, this Court has determined that failure to have regard for the width and use of the street by swerving off the side of the road or crossing the marker lines constitutes probable cause for a traffic stop. E.g., Saucier v. City Of Poplarville, 858 So.2d 933, 935 (Miss.Ct.App.2003)
. The presence or absence of traffic is not controlling. Carelessness is a matter of reasonable interpretation, based on a wide range of factors.
¶ 9. There was probable cause for the traffic stop. Therefore, the motion to suppress the evidence found as a result was properly denied.
¶ 10. Henderson claims that he did not have notice of the sentence enhancement that he received. He was given the maximum term provided for the offense under the following statute:
Every person convicted in this state of a felony who shall have been convicted twice previously of any felony or federal crime upon charges separately...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martin v. State, 2015–KA–00772–SCT
...officer had probable cause to stop defendant after observing defendant twice cross the divider lines of the road); Henderson v. State , 878 So.2d 246 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (finding that the officer's observation of a vehicle twice approach a curb constituted probable cause to stop the vehic......
-
Berryman v. State
...the defendant on notice that he could be sentenced under either provision. Id . at 1129-30 (¶24). In Grim , this Court cited Henderson v. State , 878 So. 2d 246, 248 (¶11) (Miss. Ct. App. 2004), in which both habitual offender statutes and language were included in the indictment. In Hender......
- May v. State
-
United States v. Ramos
...Mississippi law, an officer's observations are enough for him to determine that careless driving had taken place, Henderson v. State, 878 So.2d 246, 247 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004), as well as determinations of whether a speed violation occurred. Evans v. State, 93 So.3d 62, 64 (Miss. Ct. App. 20......
-
Search and seizure
...because the driver was driving in a careless manner, prohibited by Mississippi Code Annotated § 63-3-1213. Henderson v. State (2004) 878 So.2d 246. Police o൶cer observed driver operating his car in an erratic manner during the early morning hours. The driver had almost hit a curb, and aft......