Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v KURT RICHARD-KRAUTNER KING and DENNIS GEORGE DEBOL Defendants-Appellees.

UNPUBLISHED January 12, 2001

No. 220077 Isabella Circuit Court LC No. 99-008829-FH

Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Hoekstra and Markey, JJ. PER CURIAM. Defendants were charged with carrying a concealed weapon, MCL 750.227; MSA 28.424. Their cases were consolidated for trial, and defendants moved to suppress evidence discovered during a vehicle search on the ground that the evidence was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. The trial court granted defendants' motion and suppressed the evidence. The prosecution appeals by leave granted. We reverse and remand. In the early morning hours of January 30, 1999, a 911 dispatcher in Isabella County received a call from an unknown individual reporting a disturbance at a residence on Douglas Street in Mount Pleasant. The caller told the dispatcher that a fight was about to break out and that people were running around with hockey sticks, hitting parked cars. The dispatcher tried to obtain the caller's name, but the caller hung up. Using the 911 system's caller identification function, the dispatcher reestablished contact with the caller. The caller told the dispatcher that there were people in the parking lot of the residence trying to start fights with the caller and other people, and that as they were getting into their vehicle to leave, a handgun was waved around. The caller did not provide any information regarding the vehicle's occupants, but he described the vehicle as a Ford Explorer that looked blue. The dispatcher put out a "be on the lookout" (BOL) call to patrol cars in the area, stating that people carrying hockey sticks were starting a fight at a residence on Douglas Street and a gun had been displayed before the suspects drove away in a blue Ford Explorer. A Mount Pleasant police officer on routine patrol in the area heard the BOL and drove to the location. While traveling south on Douglas, the officer observed what he believed to be a -1-

blue Ford Explorer approximately one city block from the address specified in the BOL. The officer testified the vehicle caught his eye because it was close to the location mentioned in the BOL, its description matched that of the vehicle in the BOL, and only a short time had passed since he heard the BOL. The officer followed the vehicle a short distance until it pulled into the parking lot of a nearby apartment building. As he entered the parking lot, the officer turned on the patrol car's overhead lights and shone a spotlight on the vehicle. He then noticed hockey sticks in the cargo area of the vehicle. The officer called for back up and two other Mount Pleasant police officers joined him to assist. The three officers removed defendants from the vehicle, patted them down for weapons, handcuffed them, and placed them in a patrol car. Defendants' vehicle was searched, and a handgun and nun-chucks were found in the vehicle. Defendants were subsequently arrested and, after they were given their Miranda rights, made incriminating statements to the police. Defendants moved to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the investigatory stop, arguing that the stop and subsequent search of the vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. After a hearing, the trial court found that the unknown 911 caller was inherently unreliable and the mere description of the vehicle and its proximity to the crime scene did not give the police officer reasonably articulable suspicion for stopping defendants' vehicle. The prosecutor contends that this conclusion is in error. We agree. We review the factual findings of a trial court in a suppression hearing for clear error, and affirm unless this Court has a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. People v Custer, 242 Mich App 59, 64; 618 NW2d 75 (2000). We review de novo the trial court's final ruling on the motion to suppress. Id. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and a parallel provision in the Michigan Constitution guarantee the right of an individual to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. US Const, Am IV; Const 1963, art 1,

Download PEOPLE OF MI V KURT RICHARD KRAUTNER-KING.pdf

Michigan Law