State v. Zeimer
| Decision Date | 24 May 2022 |
| Docket Number | DA 20-0107 |
| Citation | State v. Zeimer, 510 P.3d 100 (Mont. 2022) |
| Parties | STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Michael Allen ZEIMER, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
For Appellant: Samir F. Aarab, Boland Aarab PLLP, Great Falls, Montana
For Appellee: Austin Knudsen, Montana Attorney General, Michael P. Dougherty, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana, Brett Irigoin, Dawson County Attorney, Glendive, Montana
¶1 Michael Allen Zeimer (Zeimer) appeals from his December 24, 2020 convictions in the Montana Seventh Judicial District Court, Dawson County, on the offenses of felony criminal possession of dangerous drugs (methamphetamine) and misdemeanor criminal possession of drug paraphernalia. Zeimer asserts that the convictions are invalidly based on evidence seized as the fruit of an unlawfully-prolonged investigatory traffic stop. We address the following dispositive issue:
Whether the District Court erroneously denied Zeimer's motion for suppression of evidence discovered upon a vehicle search that resulted from an unlawfully prolonged investigative DUI stop?
We reverse.
¶2 At approximately 9:00 a.m. on April 15, 2019, a deputy Dawson County Sheriff (Deputy 1) responded to the Town Pump Travel Center in Glendive, Montana,1 on an employee's 911 report that a vehicle was irregularly parked in the rear parking lot of the truck stop with the driver slumped over the steering wheel. At the subsequent suppression hearing, Deputy 1 characterized the 911 dispatch as a "a welfare check." He further acknowledged on cross-examination that the report stated nothing more than that a pickup truck was parked "irregularly," perpendicular to and across several striped parking spaces in the rear parking lot, with someone "slumped over their steering wheel," "sleeping."
¶3 Deputy 1 testified that, upon his arrival at the truck stop, he saw the pickup irregularly parked as described in the 911 report. He recounted that, as he approached, he saw the driver, later identified as Zeimer, "appear[ ] to look up from the steering wheel, check his mirrors," and then notice the approaching patrol car. He testified that, though he could not tell whether the truck's engine was already running, Zeimer "proceeded to drive [forward] ... in a slow ... circle ... around to the frontside" of the store, where he properly parked in a lined parking space. The deputy's body-cam recording, admitted into evidence at the suppression hearing, did not capture his initial observations upon arrival. It first captured Zeimer as he exited his truck after parking in front of the store and then calmly walked forward to the front corner of his truck where he stopped and waited for the deputy to approach on foot.2 As Zeimer exited his vehicle, the deputy pulled in and parked in the lined parking space next to Zeimer's truck and then immediately walked over and personally engaged him.
¶4 Deputy 1 testified that, based on his training and experience, the "suspicious" circumstances observed upon his arrival (i.e., the manner in which the truck was parked perpendicular across the lined parking spaces with the driver slumped over the steering wheel, the driver's decision to move and drive around to the front of the store on approach of the patrol car, and his "slow driving" around the front of the building with turns that were "rounded and slow" rather than "sharp" or "crisp") were "usually" indicative of "somebody who [was either] impaired or suffering from a medical condition." In further describing his thought process at the time, the deputy explained that, in trying to assess which, if not both, of those possible scenarios might be the case, he intended to first check on Zeimer's welfare and then attempt to ascertain whether he had been driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol or drugs.3
¶5 Upon engaging Zeimer at the front of his truck, Deputy 1 identified himself and inquired as follows:
The deputy then presumptively questioned Zeimer non-sequitur about his prior association with another individual (Rob Hammonds) who had no apparent involvement or relationship to the DUI investigation, to wit:
The questioning then returned to questions regarding Zeimer's presence and circumstances at the truck stop, and his motor vehicle registration and liability insurance compliance:
¶6 Having, as manifest in the body-cam...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Mont. Democratic Party v. Jacobsen
... ... Christi JACOBSEN, in her official capacity as Montana Secretary of State, Defendant and Appellant. DA 22-0667 Supreme Court of Montana. Submitted on Briefs: October 25, 2023 Decided: March 27, 2024 545 P.3d 1081 West ... Zeimer , 2022 MT 96, ¶ 23 n.13, 408 Mont. 433, 510 P.3d 100 ("[a]part from the implicit privacy protection provided by the Fourth Amendment and similar ... ...
-
State v. Wiskowski
... ... at 738 (quoting another source). ¶ 23. In another case, an officer responded to a call concerning an irregularly parked vehicle with the driver "slumped over the steering wheel." State v. Zeimer, 510 P.3d 100, ¶ 2 (Mont. 2022). When the officer went to check on the driver, he saw him "perk-up, check his mirrors, put the truck in gear, and lawfully drive away without any apparent indicia of peril, distress, or need for assistance." Id., ¶ 33. At that point, the officer's welfare-check ... ...
-
State v. Loberg
... ... The officer acknowledged he did not have sufficient evidence to support a DUI investigation. The evidence at the suppression hearing consisted of " ‘otherwise perfectly legal or innocuous conduct or behavior’ " and not indicia of illegal drug activity. Noli, ¶ 32 (quoting State v. Zeimer, 2022 MT 96, ¶ 50, 408 Mont. 433, 510 P.3d 100). Loberg’s detention and canine sniff were supported by no more than a generalized suspicion or an inarticulable hunch of criminal activity. The State has not provided sufficient evidence to satisfy an exception to the search warrant requirements of ... ...
-
State v. Loberg
... ... The officer acknowledged he did not have sufficient evidence to support a DUI investigation. The evidence at the suppression hearing consisted of " ‘otherwise perfectly legal or innocuous conduct or behavior’ " and not indicia of illegal drug activity. Noli, ¶ 32 (quoting State v. Zeimer, 2022 MT 96, ¶ 50, 408 Mont. 433, 510 P.3d 100). Loberg’s detention and canine sniff were supported by no more than a generalized suspicion or an inarticulable hunch of554 P.3d 706 criminal activity. The State has not provided sufficient evidence to satisfy an exception to the search warrant ... ...