Rodriquez v. State, CR

• Decision Date: 10 July 1989
• Docket Number: No. CR,CR
• Citation: Rodriquez v. State, 773 S.W.2d 821, 299 Ark. 421 (Ark. 1989)
• Parties: Gilberto RODRIQUEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Arkansas, Appellee. 88-142.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Page 821

773 S.W.2d 821

299 Ark. 421

Gilberto RODRIQUEZ, Appellant, v.STATE of Arkansas, Appellee.

No. CR 88-142.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

July 10, 1989.

Darrell F. Brown, Little Rock, for appellant.

J. Denhammcclendeon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Little Rock, for appellee.

HOLT, Chief Justice.

AppellantGilberto Rodriquez was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, 320 pounds of cocaine, and was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined $250,000.00.He argues on appeal that the trial court erred in not granting his motion to suppress since the traffic stop of the vehicle he was driving was a pretext and not based on probable cause, resulting instead from an impermissible "profile stop" that rendered the subsequent warrantless and otherwise unjustified search of the vehicle unlawful.Appellant further argues his trial was characterized by abuses of discretion and other irregularities that individually and collectively worked to deny him due process of law.We find no error and affirm.

At about 3:00 p.m. on December 19, 1987, Arkansas State Police OfficerSteven Cook was on routine patrol traveling south on Interstate 55 near Osceola.It was foggy and raining hard at the time.Officer Cook observed a silver Lincoln coming from the opposite direction and determined the vehicle was speeding, which was confirmed by radar showing the Lincoln to be going 70 in a 65 mph zone.Cook drove his vehicle across the median with the intent of stopping the driver to issue a warning citation.The Lincoln exited from the interstate and proceeded almost one mile to the driveway of a house trailer.

Cook parked behind the Lincoln whereupon appellant exited the car and offered to produce a birth certificate as identification in lieu of a driver's license.Upon determining that Rodriquez had no connection with the people in the trailer, Cook requested that appellant back his car out of the driveway before producing the birth certificate.After Cook had moved his patrol unit, Rodriquez backed his vehicle into the street but then proceeded to flee the scene at a high rate of speed.Cook pursued Rodriquez and requested a backup.Eventually, the vehicle Rodriquez was driving became stuck in the mud on an air strip nearby.Cook's vehicle also became mired in the mud, and he continued his pursuit on foot since Rodriquez had abandoned the Lincoln with the engine running and the front door open.

While Cook and other officers who arrived at the scene searched for Rodriquez, a deputy remained with the vehicles on the air strip.Rodriquez was later apprehended, arrested for fleeing and driving with a suspended driver's license, given his Miranda rights, and transported to a local detention center.The Lincoln was removed from the mud by officers at the scene and was driven to a service station used by the Arkansas State Police for towing services with the intent that the vehicle's contents would be inventoried.

En route to the service station, the officer driving the Lincoln observed three rolled cigarettes on the floorboard and a clear plastic baggie containing a green leafy substance he believed to be marijuana.Once the vehicle was examined at the service station, it was discovered that the trunk contained a cardboard box and five duffle bags secured with padlocks.The contents of one of the bags was visible through a small opening that revealed the presence of a white powdery substance.The officers closed the trunk and secured the vehicle at another location where an inventory of the contents of the trunk produced approximately 320 pounds of what was later determined to be cocaine.

Rodriquez first contends the traffic stop of the vehicle was a pretext and this was actually a profile stop because, he argues, "it looked peculiar [to Officer Cook] for a Hispanic man to be traveling in Arkansas in a Lincoln Town Car."The argument is without merit.

In reviewing a trial judge's ruling on a motion to suppress, we make an independent determination based upon the totality of the circumstances and reverse only if the ruling was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.Campbell v. State, 294 Ark. 639, 746 S.W.2d 37(1988).Officer Cook testified it was foggy and raining hard at the time he observed Rodriquez coming towards him.He concluded that appellant was speeding, and his observations were confirmed by radar which clocked the Lincolnat 70 mph in a 65 mph zone.Under the circumstances then existing, Cook was clearly warranted in stopping the vehicle.In this regard, Ark.Code Ann. § 27-51-201(a)(1)(1987) provides that no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing.Section 27-51-201(d) provides that consistent with the requirements of subsection (a), "the driver of every vehicle shall drive at an appropriate reduced speed ... when special hazard exists with respect to ... or by reason of weather or highway conditions."

Cook testified his only intent was to issue a warning citation.He further testified that at no point during his initial observation of the vehicle was he able to distinguish the driver's features, and he did not notice that the vehicle had Texas plates until he parked his patrol unit behind the Lincoln at the house trailer.Suffice it to say, we find the argument that the stop was pretextual or based upon a "profile" entirely unconvincing.The trial court did not err in...