State v. Glover
| Decision Date | 12 June 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 116,446,116,446 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellant, v. Charles GLOVER, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Andrew Bauch, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and John Grobmyer, legal intern, Charles E. Branson, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, were with him on the brief for appellant.
Elbridge Griffy IV, of Lawrence, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellee.
This case is on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with its opinion in Kansas v. Glover , 589 U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 1183, 206 L. Ed. 2d 412 (2020).
The factual and procedural details of the case are fully set out in our opinion in State v. Glover , 308 Kan. 590, 422 P.3d 64 (2018), and will not be restated here. We affirmed the district court's ruling granting Charles Glover's motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop. The district court determined the officer lacked reasonable suspicion of illegal activity when he stopped the truck, making the seizure a violation of Glover's rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court of Appeals reversed. State v. Glover , 54 Kan. App. 2d 377, 400 P.3d 182 (2017). We agreed with the district court and reversed the Court of Appeals.
The State filed a writ of certiorari, which the United States Supreme Court granted. It then held an investigative traffic stop made after running a vehicle's license plate and learning that the registered owner's driver's license has been revoked is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if the officer lacks information negating an inference that the owner is driving the vehicle. 140 S. Ct. at 1187-91. The Court also held the stipulated facts revealed no information known by the deputy sufficient to rebut the reasonable inference that Glover drove the truck. 140 S. Ct. at 1191. The Court reversed and remanded our judgment in Kansas v. Glover .
As a result, this case is again before us. In accordance with the decision of the United States Supreme Court, we vacate our judgment reversing the Court of Appeals. and affirming the district court. We remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The judgment of the district court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the district court with directions.
To continue reading
Request your trial