State v. Morgan, 38305.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Idaho |
| Writing for the Court | HORTON, Justice. |
| Citation | 294 P.3d 1121,154 Idaho 109 |
| Parties | STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Phillip James MORGAN, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Docket Number | No. 38305.,38305. |
| Decision Date | 25 January 2013 |
154 Idaho 109
294 P.3d 1121
STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff–Respondent,
v.
Phillip James MORGAN, Defendant–Appellant.
No. 38305.
Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise, November 2012 Term.
Jan. 25, 2013.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Jason Pintler argued.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. Kenneth Jorgensen argued.
HORTON, Justice.
This case arises from the traffic stop and subsequent arrest of Phillip James Morgan. A Boise City police officer observed Morgan
driving in a way that caused the officer to believe Morgan was trying to avoid him. The officer initiated a traffic stop after observing that Morgan's vehicle did not have a front license plate and after Morgan stopped his vehicle on a roadway, believing these to be violations of I.C. §§ 49–428 and 49–659, respectively. Morgan was subsequently arrested for DUI. Morgan filed a motion to suppress all evidence garnered from the traffic stop, arguing the officer did not have reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop. The district court concluded that although Morgan may not have actually violated these traffic laws, the officer had reasonable articulable suspicion to believe that he had done so. Morgan's motion to suppress was denied, and he was convicted of felony DUI after a jury trial. Morgan timely appealed his conviction, arguing it was error for the district court to deny his motion to suppress. We reverse the district court's order denying the motion to suppress, vacate the judgment of conviction and remand for further proceedings.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A Boise City police officer was on patrol on a Friday night when he observed an SUV driving without a front license plate. He turned to follow the vehicle to determine whether it was a vehicle licensed in Idaho, as any vehicle licensed in Idaho must have a front and rear license plate. While the officer followed the SUV, it made a series of left-hand turns, ending up where the officer first began following it. The officer stated that the driver of the SUV was either very lost or was trying to avoid him. However, the SUV did not violate any traffic laws. At that point, the SUV pulled to the right but remained on the roadway. The officer was able to determine that the SUV was not registered in the state of Idaho. The officer initiated a traffic stop, believing the driver of the SUV had committed an infraction of Idaho Code by blocking the roadway. After approaching the vehicle and conducting field-sobriety tests, the officer arrested Morgan for DUI.
Prior to trial, Morgan moved to have all evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop suppressed. Morgan argued that there was no reasonable and articulable suspicion that he was operating his vehicle contrary to traffic laws. In a written decision, the district court denied Morgan's motion, holding:
It goes without saying that [the officer's] suspicion that Mr. Morgan was avoiding him was not the type of suspicion sufficient to permit an investigatory stop and detention. Nevertheless, at the time of the initiation of the temporary stop and detention, that is, when the overhead lights went on subsequently to Mr. Morgan's voluntary stop, [the officer] also had a reasonable articulable suspicion that the defendant had violated I.C. Sections 49–428 and 49–659.
Morgan's case then proceeded to trial and he was found guilty. The district court imposed an eight year sentence, with two years fixed, and retained jurisdiction. Morgan timely appealed, asserting that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo. State v. Munoz, 149 Idaho 121, 127, 233 P.3d 52, 58 (2010). "However, in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gonzales, Docket No. 46973
...v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302, 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo ." State v. Morgan, 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) (citing State v. Munoz, 149 Idaho 121, 127, 233 P.3d 52, 58 (2010) ). "The review must be based on the tota......
-
State v. Bonner, Docket No. 46097
...Idaho 206, 207, 207 P.3d 182, 183 (2009) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo." Id. (quoting State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) ). "The review must be based on the totality of the circumstances rather than examining each of the officer......
-
State v. Bonner, Docket No. 46097
...Idaho 206, 207, 207 P.3d 182, 183 (2009) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo." Id. (quoting State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) ). "The review must be based on the totality of the circumstances rather than examining each of the officer......
-
State v. Fairchild, Docket No. 44617
...justified by an officer's reasonable articulable suspicion that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a crime. State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 112, 294 P.3d 1121, 1124 (2013). "Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, articulable facts and the rational inferences that can b......
-
State v. Gonzales, Docket No. 46973
...v. Diaz, 144 Idaho 300, 302, 160 P.3d 739, 741 (2007) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo ." State v. Morgan, 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) (citing State v. Munoz, 149 Idaho 121, 127, 233 P.3d 52, 58 (2010) ). "The review must be based on the tota......
-
State v. Bonner, Docket No. 46097
...Idaho 206, 207, 207 P.3d 182, 183 (2009) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo." Id. (quoting State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) ). "The review must be based on the totality of the circumstances rather than examining each of the officer......
-
State v. Bonner, Docket No. 46097
...Idaho 206, 207, 207 P.3d 182, 183 (2009) )."Determinations of reasonable suspicion are reviewed de novo." Id. (quoting State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 111, 294 P.3d 1121, 1123 (2013) ). "The review must be based on the totality of the circumstances rather than examining each of the officer......
-
State v. Fairchild, Docket No. 44617
...justified by an officer's reasonable articulable suspicion that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a crime. State v. Morgan , 154 Idaho 109, 112, 294 P.3d 1121, 1124 (2013). "Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific, articulable facts and the rational inferences that can b......