ENTERED JAN 3 fl 2015 A Tn~<:rCony I ,, /::' 0s7107 Attest \:::/a/&/ li ;/,;. ') ./ (/ c·· ,-:··;r~- .. STATE OF MAINE r~,... ~- ' ·: '-·: ,-, . :_. UN1FIED CRIMINAL COURT CUMBERLAND, ss. CUMS~::-L.:1UO, SS PORTLAND CLE?;\'S OFFICE Docket No. CR-14-5127 £~ k -CUW)- 0}-")./-f'S STATE OF MAINE ) Z015 JAN 21 f)f1 1 gw.DER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS v. ) ) HANNAH BURTON )
A hearing was held on Defendant's Motion to Suppress on December 16, 2014. The State was represented by ADA Matthew Tice. Defendant was represented by Attorney James Boulos.
Defendant seeks to suppress all of the evidence resulting from the stop of her vehicle. She alleges that the stop violated her Fourth Amendment rights because it was effected without the requisite "reasonable articulable suspicion." She also argues that the officer did not have authority to order her to participate in field sobriety tests.
The court heard testimony from Officer Lee Maher, the officer who conducted the stop. He testified that he was on patrol in North Windham shortly after midnight on August 2, 20 14 when he got a call about a fight in progress at the Big Apple on Route 302 in North Windham. The information he received was that there were four people involved in the fight and that three of them had left the store in a white Ford SUV. Office Maher spotted a vehicle matching that description about a mile or less from the store, headed in the opposite direction from him. He turned around and with his high beams observed that there were three people inside. He then conducted a traffic stop. Officer Maher smelled alcohol coming from the vehicle and observed that the driver, Defendant, had glassy and bloodshot eyes. Officer Maher asked if she had been drinking and she responded that she had had about a drink every hour. Officer Maher then ordered Defendant out of the vehicle so that he could conduct field sobriety tests.
The standard governing automotive stops is well-established: 11 In order to support a brief investigatory stop of a motor vehicle, such as the stop in this case, a police officer must have an objectively reasonable, articulable suspicion that either criminal conduct, a civil violation, or a threat to public safety has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur. The officer's suspicion that any of these circumstances exist must be objectively reasonable in the totality ofthe circumstances." See, e.g., State v. Porter, 2008 ME 175, ~ 8, 960 A.2d 321,323 (citing State v. SyLvain, 2003 ME 5, ~ 11, 814 A.2d 984, 987).
Applying this standard, the court finds that the information as to the fight gave rise to reasonable articulable suspicion justifying the stop of Defendant's vehicle. Officer Maher need not have personally observed the fight in progress in order to have had reasonable articulable suspicion for the stop. See, e.g., State v. Carr, 1997 ME 221, ~ 7, 704 A.2d 353, 356 ("Reasonable and articulable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop can rest on the collective knowledge of the police") (citing State v. Gervais, 394 A.2d 1183, 1189 (Me. 1978) (holding that collective knowledge of the police transmitted by radio dispatch justified stopping a vehicle)). Furthermore, on observing Defendant's glassy, bloodshot eyes and on learning that she had been drinking, Officer Maher acted appropriately in requiring her to participate in field sobriety tests. See, e.g., State v. King, 2009 ME 14, ~ 9, 965 A.2d 52, 54 (officer had objectively reasonable suspicion that driver might have been impaired when smelled odor of alcohol, observed beer bottles or cans in vehicle, and driver admitted to being a "three" where "one" meant total sobriety). As the Law Court stated in State v. Sylvain, 2003 ME 5, 814 A.2d 984:
When, as here, an officer has observed bloodshot eyes and has heard an admission from a driver that the driver has had two beers, it is objectively reasonable for that officer to entertain a suspicion that the driver may be impaired by the alcohol. Subjecting the driver to field sobriety tests following that admission does not offend the Fourth Amendment.
!d.~ 18, 814 A.2d at 989.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
DATED: _\'-=:l.J=+-'~\-=-g\t-\_t_ \ \ STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET VS CUMBERLAND, ss. HANNAH L BURTON Docket No CUMCD-CR-2014-05127 36 "\WRENCE RD POh •.•.,.L ME 04069 DOCKET RECORD
DOB: 05/08/1986 Attorney: JAME·s BOULOS State's Attorney: STEPHANIE ANDERSON THE BOULOS LAW FIRM PO BOX 856 75 NORTH ST SACO ME 04072-0856 RETAINED 08/11/2014
Charge (s)
1 OUI (ALCOHOL) 08/0212014 WINDHAM Seq 12942 29-A 2411 (1-A) (A) Class D MAHER '\ I WND 2 OUI (ALCOHOL) 08102/2014 WINDHAM Seq 12942 29-A 2411 (1-A) (A) Class D MAHER \ I WND
Docket Events:
08/06/2014 FILING DOCUMENT - NON CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 08/04/2014
1 08 2014 BAIL BOND- $2,500.00 UNSECURED BAIL BOND FILED ON 08/04/2014
Bail Amt: $2,500 Date Bailed: 08/02/2014 08/12/2014 Party(s): HANNAH L BURTON ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 08/11/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 08/20/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING- ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 09/09/2014 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 1
OB/20/2014 Charge (s) : 1, 2 SUPPLEMENTAL FILING - COMPLAINT FILED ON 08/20/2014
09/10/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT WAIVED ON 09/09/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 09/10/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY COUNSEL ON 08/11/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 09/10/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 11/20/2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Room No. 7
09/J 0/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 11/20/2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Room No. 7 CR 200 Page 1 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015 HANNAH L BURTON CUMCD-CR-2014-05127 DOCKET RECORD
09/~v/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 01/12/2015 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 11
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 09/22/2014 LETTER - FROM PARTY FILED ON 09/22/2014
LETTER FROM ATTY UPDATING DEF'S PHONE NUMBER 11/07/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE NOTICE SENT ON 11/07/2014
11/20/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE HELD ON 11/20/2014 ROLAND A COLE , JUSTICE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: JENNIFER ACKERMAN CONTINUE TO MOTION HEARING. 11/21/2014 OTHER FILING - REQUEST FOR CHEMIST AT TRIAL FILED ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
TO SUPPRESS ALPHABET AND NUMBERS TEST 11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 12/09/2014 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 11/--/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT NOTICE SENT ON 11/21/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
TO SUPPRESS SOBRIETY TESTS 11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION EXPERT WITNESS REPORT FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT CONTINUED ON 12/09/2014 ROLAND A COLE , JUSTICE DA: JENNIFER ACKERMAN CONTINUED BY AGREEMENT OF PARTIES TO 12.16.14 AT 1PM 12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 12/16/2014 at 01:00p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT NOTICE SENT ON 12/09/2014 KRISTINA JOYCE , ASSISTANT CLERK 12/17/2014 HEARING- MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT HELD ON 12/16/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: MATTHEW TICE Defendant Present in Court
MOTION TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. JUSTICE KELLY HAS FILE.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
ENTERED JAN 3 fl 2015 A Tn~<:rCony I ,, /::' 0s7107 Attest \:::/a/&/ li ;/,;. ') ./ (/ c·· ,-:··;r~- .. STATE OF MAINE r~,... ~- ' ·: '-·: ,-, . :_. UN1FIED CRIMINAL COURT CUMBERLAND, ss. CUMS~::-L.:1UO, SS PORTLAND CLE?;\'S OFFICE Docket No. CR-14-5127 £~ k -CUW)- 0}-")./-f'S STATE OF MAINE ) Z015 JAN 21 f)f1 1 gw.DER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS v. ) ) HANNAH BURTON )
A hearing was held on Defendant's Motion to Suppress on December 16, 2014. The State was represented by ADA Matthew Tice. Defendant was represented by Attorney James Boulos.
Defendant seeks to suppress all of the evidence resulting from the stop of her vehicle. She alleges that the stop violated her Fourth Amendment rights because it was effected without the requisite "reasonable articulable suspicion." She also argues that the officer did not have authority to order her to participate in field sobriety tests.
The court heard testimony from Officer Lee Maher, the officer who conducted the stop. He testified that he was on patrol in North Windham shortly after midnight on August 2, 20 14 when he got a call about a fight in progress at the Big Apple on Route 302 in North Windham. The information he received was that there were four people involved in the fight and that three of them had left the store in a white Ford SUV. Office Maher spotted a vehicle matching that description about a mile or less from the store, headed in the opposite direction from him. He turned around and with his high beams observed that there were three people inside. He then conducted a traffic stop. Officer Maher smelled alcohol coming from the vehicle and observed that the driver, Defendant, had glassy and bloodshot eyes. Officer Maher asked if she had been drinking and she responded that she had had about a drink every hour. Officer Maher then ordered Defendant out of the vehicle so that he could conduct field sobriety tests.
The standard governing automotive stops is well-established: 11 In order to support a brief investigatory stop of a motor vehicle, such as the stop in this case, a police officer must have an objectively reasonable, articulable suspicion that either criminal conduct, a civil violation, or a threat to public safety has occurred, is occurring, or is about to occur. The officer's suspicion that any of these circumstances exist must be objectively reasonable in the totality ofthe circumstances." See, e.g., State v. Porter, 2008 ME 175, ~ 8, 960 A.2d 321,323 (citing State v. SyLvain, 2003 ME 5, ~ 11, 814 A.2d 984, 987).
Applying this standard, the court finds that the information as to the fight gave rise to reasonable articulable suspicion justifying the stop of Defendant's vehicle. Officer Maher need not have personally observed the fight in progress in order to have had reasonable articulable suspicion for the stop. See, e.g., State v. Carr, 1997 ME 221, ~ 7, 704 A.2d 353, 356 ("Reasonable and articulable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop can rest on the collective knowledge of the police") (citing State v. Gervais, 394 A.2d 1183, 1189 (Me. 1978) (holding that collective knowledge of the police transmitted by radio dispatch justified stopping a vehicle)). Furthermore, on observing Defendant's glassy, bloodshot eyes and on learning that she had been drinking, Officer Maher acted appropriately in requiring her to participate in field sobriety tests. See, e.g., State v. King, 2009 ME 14, ~ 9, 965 A.2d 52, 54 (officer had objectively reasonable suspicion that driver might have been impaired when smelled odor of alcohol, observed beer bottles or cans in vehicle, and driver admitted to being a "three" where "one" meant total sobriety). As the Law Court stated in State v. Sylvain, 2003 ME 5, 814 A.2d 984:
When, as here, an officer has observed bloodshot eyes and has heard an admission from a driver that the driver has had two beers, it is objectively reasonable for that officer to entertain a suspicion that the driver may be impaired by the alcohol. Subjecting the driver to field sobriety tests following that admission does not offend the Fourth Amendment.
!d.~ 18, 814 A.2d at 989.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
DATED: _\'-=:l.J=+-'~\-=-g\t-\_t_ \ \ STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET VS CUMBERLAND, ss. HANNAH L BURTON Docket No CUMCD-CR-2014-05127 36 "\WRENCE RD POh •.•.,.L ME 04069 DOCKET RECORD
DOB: 05/08/1986 Attorney: JAME·s BOULOS State's Attorney: STEPHANIE ANDERSON THE BOULOS LAW FIRM PO BOX 856 75 NORTH ST SACO ME 04072-0856 RETAINED 08/11/2014
Charge (s)
1 OUI (ALCOHOL) 08/0212014 WINDHAM Seq 12942 29-A 2411 (1-A) (A) Class D MAHER '\ I WND 2 OUI (ALCOHOL) 08102/2014 WINDHAM Seq 12942 29-A 2411 (1-A) (A) Class D MAHER \ I WND
Docket Events:
08/06/2014 FILING DOCUMENT - NON CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 08/04/2014
1 08 2014 BAIL BOND- $2,500.00 UNSECURED BAIL BOND FILED ON 08/04/2014
Bail Amt: $2,500 Date Bailed: 08/02/2014 08/12/2014 Party(s): HANNAH L BURTON ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 08/11/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 08/20/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING- ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 09/09/2014 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 1
OB/20/2014 Charge (s) : 1, 2 SUPPLEMENTAL FILING - COMPLAINT FILED ON 08/20/2014
09/10/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT WAIVED ON 09/09/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 09/10/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY COUNSEL ON 08/11/2014
Attorney: JAMES BOULOS 09/10/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 11/20/2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Room No. 7
09/J 0/2014 Charge (s): 1, 2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 11/20/2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Room No. 7 CR 200 Page 1 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015 HANNAH L BURTON CUMCD-CR-2014-05127 DOCKET RECORD
09/~v/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 01/12/2015 at 08:30 a.m. in Room No. 11
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 09/22/2014 LETTER - FROM PARTY FILED ON 09/22/2014
LETTER FROM ATTY UPDATING DEF'S PHONE NUMBER 11/07/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE NOTICE SENT ON 11/07/2014
11/20/2014 Charge(s): 1,2 HEARING - DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE HELD ON 11/20/2014 ROLAND A COLE , JUSTICE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: JENNIFER ACKERMAN CONTINUE TO MOTION HEARING. 11/21/2014 OTHER FILING - REQUEST FOR CHEMIST AT TRIAL FILED ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
TO SUPPRESS ALPHABET AND NUMBERS TEST 11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 12/09/2014 at 01:00 p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 11/--/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT NOTICE SENT ON 11/21/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
TO SUPPRESS SOBRIETY TESTS 11/21/2014 MOTION - MOTION EXPERT WITNESS REPORT FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 11/20/2014
12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT CONTINUED ON 12/09/2014 ROLAND A COLE , JUSTICE DA: JENNIFER ACKERMAN CONTINUED BY AGREEMENT OF PARTIES TO 12.16.14 AT 1PM 12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT SCHEDULED FOR 12/16/2014 at 01:00p.m. in Room No. 1
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/10/2014 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT NOTICE SENT ON 12/09/2014 KRISTINA JOYCE , ASSISTANT CLERK 12/17/2014 HEARING- MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT HELD ON 12/16/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: MATTHEW TICE Defendant Present in Court
MOTION TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. JUSTICE KELLY HAS FILE. TAPE 6493 INDEX 874-1349; CR 200 Page 2 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015 HANNAH L BURTON CUMCD-CR-2014-05127 DOCKET RECORD TESTIMONY OFFICER MAHER (INDEX 923) 12 1 _ ./2014 CASE STATUS - CASE FILE LOCATION ON 12/17/2014
JUDGE KELLY HAS THE FILE 12/19/2014 MOTION - MOTION EXPERT WITNESS REPORT DENIED ON 12/18/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: MATTHEW TICE MOTION DENIED TAPE 6493 INDEX 894 12/19/2014 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS DENIED ON 12/18/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE Attorney: JAMES BOULOS DA: MATTHEW TICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL TAPE 6493 INDEX 874-1349; TESTIMONY OFFICER MAHER (INDEX 923) UNDER ADVISEMENT 01/21/2015 Charge(s): 1,2 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL NOT HELD ON 01/21/2015
MOTION TO SUPPRESS IS UNDER ADVISEMENT, RESET WHEN DECISION IS FILED. 01/21/2015 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 02/23/2015 at 08:30a.m. in Room No. 11
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/21/2015 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL NOTICE SENT ON 01/21/2015
01/21/2015 CASE STATUS - CASE FILE RETURNED ON 01/21/2015
01;. ;2015 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS STATEMENT DENIED ON 12/18/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/21/2015 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS DENIED ON 12/18/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 01/21/2015 ORDER - COURT ORDER FILED ON 12/18/2014
ORDER ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS 01/21/2015 ORDER - COURT ORDER ENTERED ON 12/18/2014 MARY KELLY , JUDGE ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS IS DENIED
/ COPY SENT TO ATTY, ADA, AND MARIAH
A TRUE COPY ATTEST: Clerk
CR 200 Page 3 of 3 Printed on: 01/22/2015