State v. Scheffert
Decision Date | 06 April 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 16-0267,16-0267 |
Citation | 910 N.W.2d 577 |
Parties | STATE of Iowa, Appellee, v. Michael SCHEFFERT, Appellant. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Thomas J. Viner of Viner Law Firm, P.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tyler J. Buller, Assistant Attorney General, Brian Williams, County Attorney, and Molly Tomsha, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
This appeal involves a decision by the district court denying a motorist’s motion to suppress evidence obtained after an officer stopped the motorist’s vehicle for being on a county access road after hours. At trial, the district court convicted the motorist of possession of a controlled substance in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5) (2015). The motorist appealed, arguing the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We transferred the case to the court of appeals, which reversed the district court’s denial of the motorist’s motion to suppress. The State filed an application for further review.
When we first considered the State’s application for further review, we disagreed with the court of appeals’ reasoning, but we still found the officer did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop the motorist’s vehicle when it was on a county access road after hours. We therefore vacated the decision of the court of appeals, reversed the judgment of the district court, and remanded the case for a new trial.
Thereafter, we granted the State’s petition for rehearing and now withdraw our original opinion. Upon further consideration of the parties’ arguments and the pertinent legal authorities, we find the officer had probable cause to stop the motorist’s vehicle when it was on a county access road after hours. Accordingly, we vacate the decision of the court of appeals and affirm the judgment of the district court.
On May 30, 2015, at approximately 12:37 a.m., Deputy Tim Peterson with the Black Hawk County Sheriff’s Department observed a vehicle on Beaver Valley Road in the Falls Access area. Falls Access is a county conservation property open to the public for hunting and fishing. Beaver Valley Road is a gravel road maintained by the county conservation board. Deputy Peterson stopped the vehicle because he believed Michael Scheffert, the driver, was committing a crime by being in Falls Access after 10:30 p.m. Deputy Matthew Harris, who assisted Deputy Peterson with the stop, testified the hours in which the public may be in Falls Access is from 6 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.
After stopping Scheffert’s vehicle, Deputy Peterson obtained Scheffert’s consent to search the vehicle. During the search, Deputy Peterson found a marijuana pipe with residue and a prescription pill bottle that had a clear plastic bag containing marijuana. Scheffert told Deputy Peterson the marijuana belonged to him.
The State charged Scheffert with possession of a controlled substance (marijuana), second offense, in violation of Iowa Code section 124.401(5). Scheffert moved to suppress the evidence seized from the vehicle, contending the stop and search violated the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution.
At the hearing on the motion to suppress, Scheffert argued Deputy Peterson lacked either probable cause or reasonable suspicion to justify the stop. The thrust of Scheffert’s argument at the hearing was that officials should have posted a sign displaying the park’s hours in order to make his presence in Falls Access after hours illegal. Deputy Harris testified there had been signage to identify Falls Access at the intersection of Beaver Valley Road and North Union Road in the past, but it never had park hours posted on it. Deputy Harris did not recall whether there was a sign posted on May 30, the night of the stop. According to his conversation with a Black Hawk County conservation officer, there was not a sign posted on the day of the hearing on the motion to suppress. There was no other evidence of signs regarding the Beaver Valley Road in the Falls Access area.
The district court denied Scheffert’s motion to suppress. After a trial on the minutes of testimony, the district court convicted Scheffert of possession of a controlled substance (marijuana), second offense. Scheffert appealed, arguing the district court erred in failing to suppress the evidence. We transferred the case to the court of appeals. The court of appeals reversed the denial of Scheffert’s motion to suppress. The State sought further review, which we granted.
When we first considered the State’s application for further review, we disagreed with the court of appeals’ reasoning, but we nevertheless found the officer did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop the motorist’s vehicle when it was on a county access road after hours. We thus vacated the decision of the court of appeals, reversed the judgment of the district court, and remanded the case for a new trial.
The State filed a petition for rehearing, which we granted.
We consider whether the stop of Scheffert’s vehicle was contrary to the protections of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution or article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution.
Our review of constitutional claims is de novo. State v. Tague , 676 N.W.2d 197, 201 (Iowa 2004). We make an "independent evaluation of the totality of the circumstances as shown by the entire record." Id. (quoting State v. Turner , 630 N.W.2d 601, 606 (Iowa 2001) ). We give deference to the district court’s factual findings, but they do not bind us. Id.
At the hearing, the State relied on Iowa Code sections 461A.46 and 350.5 to establish Deputy Peterson had probable cause to stop Scheffert’s vehicle for being on Beaver Valley Road in the Falls Access area after 10:30 p.m. The State argued, The State further contended it was "not aware of any authority that requires a sign to be posted." The State maintains this argument in its briefing on appeal.
The district court determined Scheffert violated the Code by entering Falls Access at 12:37 a.m. regardless of whether there was a sign posted to identify the county access area or the park hours. Thus, the district court denied Scheffert’s motion to suppress.
In Tague , which we decided under the Iowa Constitution, we applied the federal standards of probable cause and reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment to article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. Id. at 201, 204, 206. An officer has probable cause to stop a motorist when he or she observes a violation of our traffic laws no matter how minor the offense may be. Id. at 201. If the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity has occurred or is occurring, he or she may stop a vehicle and briefly detain the driver for investigatory purposes. Id. at 204. If the driver challenges the stop claiming the officer did not have reasonable suspicion, it becomes the State’s burden to "show by a preponderance of the evidence that the stopping officer had specific and articulable facts, which taken together with rational inferences from those facts, to reasonably believe criminal activity may have occurred." Id.
Iowa Code § 461A.46.
Our court of appeals found this section was not applicable to county conservation property open to the public for hunting and fishing under the control of the county conservation board. We disagree with the court of appeals’ interpretation of section 461A.46 for the reasons stated later in this opinion.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Price-Williams
...S.Ct. 1769.63 Id. at 814–16.64 Heien v. North Carolina , 574 U.S. 54, 60, 135 S.Ct. 530, 190 L.Ed.2d 475 (2014).65 State v. Scheffert , 910 N.W.2d 577, 585 n.2 (Iowa 2018).66 Illinois v. Wardlow , 528 U.S. 119, 124–25, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000).67 Utah v. Strieff , 579 U.S. 232,......
-
State v. Meyers
...277, 292–93 (Iowa 2000), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Turner , 630 N.W.2d 601, 606 n.2 (Iowa 2001). See State v. Scheffert , 910 N.W.2d 577, 585 n.2 (Iowa 2018) ; State v. Coleman , 890 N.W.2d 284, 298 n.2 (Iowa 2017)."Stare decisis alone dictates continued adherence to our preced......
-
Baldwin v. Estherville
...probable cause and reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment to article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution." State v. Scheffert , 910 N.W.2d 577, 582 (Iowa 2018) (citing Tague , 676 N.W.2d at 201, 204, 206 ).It is clearly no longer the case that the Iowa Constitution provides no gr......
-
State v. Stevens
...such claims, we make an "independent evaluation of the totality of the circumstances as shown by the entire record." State v. Scheffert , 910 N.W.2d 577, 581 (Iowa 2018) (quoting State v. Tague , 676 N.W.2d 197, 201 (Iowa 2004) ). "We give deference to the district court's factual findings,......