I was wondering if anyone would care to comment on a fact pattern I am looking at.
First off, I'm not a cop (though hope to be one soon). I work for a civil judge, but sometimes our court encounters elements of criminal law. Today we heard an appeal of an administrative license revocation for implied consent/refusal.
Basically the defense strategy is to get the case thrown out based on no reasonable suspicion to stop. I'll try to give the facts briefly and can elaborate later if anyone is interested.
LEO is driving down street at 3:30 a.m. and sees a car parked in a Wendy's parking lot. Driver is in the car, which appears to be running. Passenger is standing outside of car. Wendy's is closed. Lights are on outside the restaurant, but the drive-through menu is not lit. No other cars in lot. LEO turns around up the road to check it out. By the time LEO gets back, the car has just pulled out, so LEO follows and makes the stop. LEO smells alcohol, DWI arrest ensues.
Like I said, the defense is trying to get the case thrown out for lack of reasonable suspicion to make the stop. I still have to read the transcript of the LEO's testimony, but does anyone have some theories or want to make an attempt at articulating reasonable suspicion for this stop?
First off, I'm not a cop (though hope to be one soon). I work for a civil judge, but sometimes our court encounters elements of criminal law. Today we heard an appeal of an administrative license revocation for implied consent/refusal.
Basically the defense strategy is to get the case thrown out based on no reasonable suspicion to stop. I'll try to give the facts briefly and can elaborate later if anyone is interested.
LEO is driving down street at 3:30 a.m. and sees a car parked in a Wendy's parking lot. Driver is in the car, which appears to be running. Passenger is standing outside of car. Wendy's is closed. Lights are on outside the restaurant, but the drive-through menu is not lit. No other cars in lot. LEO turns around up the road to check it out. By the time LEO gets back, the car has just pulled out, so LEO follows and makes the stop. LEO smells alcohol, DWI arrest ensues.
Like I said, the defense is trying to get the case thrown out for lack of reasonable suspicion to make the stop. I still have to read the transcript of the LEO's testimony, but does anyone have some theories or want to make an attempt at articulating reasonable suspicion for this stop?
Comment