State v. Neuman
| Decision Date | 11 December 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. 79,701,79,701 |
| Citation | 970 P.2d 988,266 Kan. 319 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellant, v. William B. NEUMAN, a/k/a Brett Neuman, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
In determining the legality of a motor vehicle stop, the critical time when a law enforcement officer must have knowledge of facts, giving rise to a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the defendant had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a crime, is at the time of the actual stop, not when the law enforcement officer activates the police car's emergency lights.
Joe Shepack, county attorney, and Carla J. Stovall, attorney general, were on the brief for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.
The State appeals from the suppression of evidence and a pretrial dismissal of a DUI charge against defendant William B. Neuman, a/k/a Brett Neuman.
Ellsworth City Police Officer Larry Beagley was on duty and received a report from his 17-year-old son, who was working at a Pizza Hut in Ellsworth, that defendant had picked up an order, appeared intoxicated, and was driving a motor vehicle. Beagley was acquainted with defendant and was familiar with the vehicle which defendant drove. Beagley was stopped at a stop sign when he observed defendant's vehicle coming south on 156 Highway. Beagley testified that when defendant was about 50 to 75 yards north of the intersection, defendant "yanked or swerved to the right side of the highway."
Beagley turned onto 156 Highway and began to follow defendant's vehicle after it passed the intersection. He then decided to stop defendant's vehicle by activating his flashing lights. Defendant stopped his vehicle after Beagley had been following him for about one-half mile. While following defendant with his flashing lights on, Beagley observed defendant's vehicle cross the center line and veer onto the white line on the right side of the road. He also observed defendant throw a beer can out of his vehicle. Beagley testified that these actions were indications of a "possible drunk driver."
Field sobriety tests were administered and defendant failed the tests. He also failed a breath test.
Defendant filed a motion to suppress all evidence collected pursuant to the stop of his vehicle. Defendant contended that Beagley did not have reasonable or probable cause to arrest him. The trial court found Beagley did not have a reasonable, articulable suspicion "that criminal activity was afoot" when he made his decision to stop defendant's vehicle and activated the police car's emergency lights. Consequently, the trial court suppressed all the evidence gathered after Beagley activated his emergency lights. We hold this to be reversible error.
We have previously examined the question of whether a stop occurs when a law enforcement officer activates his or her flashing lights or whether it occurs when the officer actually stops the vehicle. In State v. Guy, 242 Kan. 840, 843, 752 P.2d 119 (1988), we held that the critical time when a law enforcement officer must have knowledge of facts, giving rise to a reasonable and articulable suspicion that defendant had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a crime, is at the time of the actual stop.
In State v. Weaver, 259 Kan. 844, 847, 915 P.2d 746 (1996), the facts are very similar to those in the case before us. In Weaver, the law enforcement officer...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State Of Kan. v. Shadden
... ... Bruch v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 282 Kan. 764, 765, 148 P.3d 538 (2006) (noting that driver technically “passed the field sobriety tests”); ... State v. Martinez, 268 Kan. 21, 24, 988 P.2d 735 (1999) (discussing defendant's failure on “field sobriety tests”); ... State v. Neuman", 266 Kan. 319, 320, 970 P.2d 988 (1998) (“Field sobriety tests were administered and defendant failed the tests. He also failed a breath test.”); 235 P.3d 826 ... City of Dodge City v. Norton, 262 Kan. 199, 204-05, 936 P.2d 1356 (1997) (discussing the validity of “field sobriety test\xE2" ... ...
-
State v. Shadden
...State v. Martinez, 268 Kan. 21, 24, 988 P.2d 735 (1999) (discussing Martinez' failure on the field sobriety tests); State v. Neuman, 266 Kan. 319, 320, 970 P.2d 988 (1998) ("Field sobriety tests were administered and defendant failed the tests. He also failed a breath test."); City of Dodge......
-
State v. Clentscale, 108,445.
...915 P.2d 746 (1996). A stop occurs when the person actually submits to an officer's show of authority. See, e.g., State v. Neuman, 266 Kan. 319, 319–21, 970 P.2d 988 (1998) (stop did not occur until defendant submitted to police authority by stopping his car about half a mile after police a......