Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops

Posted by: kwflatbed

By Ken Wallentine

DUI traffic stop became unintentional de facto arrest requiring suppression

An off-duty trooper and his friend were driving on a rural dirt road when they came upon a truck parked in the middle of the road. Worwood, the driver of the truck, got into the truck and drove it to the side of the road to allow the trooper and his friend to pass. The trooper noticed a wet spot in the dirt, a beer can, and a cooler. The trooper pulled along side the truck and spoke with Worwood. The trooper pulled his vehicle alongside Worwood's to speak to him. During the conversation, the trooper observed that Worwood had bloodshot eyes and slurred speech. Getting out of his vehicle and moving closer to Worwood, the trooper could smell alcohol on Worwood's breath.
The trooper believed that Worwood was too impaired to be driving. Lacking a cell phone or radio, the trooper told Worwood that he could not let him drive and asked Worwood to come with him to the trooper’s home. The trooper’s friend drove Worwood’s truck to a farm nearby and called for an on-duty officer to respond to the trooper’s home. After SFST’s, Worwood was arrested for DUI. His BAC test results were .248. Worwood later claimed that he had been illegally seized and subject to a de facto arrest. The Court of Appeals ruled that Worwood had been the subject of a legitimate investigatory detention and that driving him a short distance to the trooper’s home was a reasonable extension of the detention.


Full Article: http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/1634977/

---

Posted by: PearlOnyx

Case law aside, seems like a safety nightmare to me. Personally, seems like a terrible idea to take law enforcement action with a non-LEO present, who you could place in danger, with no means of communication if the stuff hits the fan. I'm assuming the friend with the Trooper is a non-LEO, since they didn't mention that he was. Even worse, for letting the friend drive the truck to the house (doesn't mention who drives the drunk in which vehicle). Even "worser" for taking an offender to your home!

That aside, there are situations where you should legally be able to take a suspect a reasonable amount of distance away from the scene to do FST's. First thing that comes to mind is a crash investigation in the driving rain. Not going to have someone do FST's in tropical storm force winds and driving rain. A trip under the hood at the local gas station will suffice. It seems like in this case the attorney for the state failed to bring up officer safety as a valid reason for the detention and tranport.

---

Posted by: sdb29

What would I have done?

"Hey man- Thanks for moving the truck!"

Continue down the road.

---

Posted by: OutOfManyOne

Wow, WTF was he thinking? I'd be driving around him and on my way home.

---

Posted by: csauce777

Quote:

Originally Posted by OutOfManyOne Wow, WTF was he thinking? I'd be driving around him and on my way home.

Why on earth would you bring some drunk to your own house? If he's bent on locking the guy up, and youre gonna drive him anywhere, why not to a main road where you can flag someone down, or to a gas station, etc? Not real bright in my opinion.

---

Posted by: Sniper

WTF ???? Any idea what state this took place in ????

---

Posted by: buckeddy

You can learn a lot from a dummy! (Both of them defendant and trooper)

---

Posted by: jettsixx

Did he know the individual? There is no way in hell I would ever bring someone to my house. Who doesnt have a Cell phone these days?

---

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2008 - Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser