Preview:

An  unpublished  opinion  of  the  North  Carolina  Court  of  Appeals  does  not  constitute
controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance
with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.
NO. COA06-712
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
Filed:  6 February  2007
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
v.                                                                                              Wayne County
                                                                                                No.  04 CRS  61172
JOHN DOUGLAS BOOTH
Appeal by defendant from judgment entered 28 November 2005 by
Judge Jerry Braswell in Wayne County Superior Court.   Heard in the
Court of Appeals  22 January  2007.
Attorney  General  Roy  Cooper,  by  Assistant  Attorney  General
Patricia A. Duffy, for the State.
Haithcock,  Barfield,  Hulse  &  Kinsey,  PLLC,  by  B.  Geoffrey
Hulse and Glenn A. Barfield, for defendant-appellant.
MARTIN, Chief Judge.
Defendant was charged by citation with driving while impaired.
He was found guilty of the charge in district court.    He appealed
to the superior court, where he filed a motion to suppress evidence
obtained as a result of an allegedly illegal and unconstitutional
arrest.   The superior court held an evidentiary hearing and denied
the motion.    Defendant then pled no contest to the charge and the
court  imposed  a  suspended  sentence.    He  appeals  pursuant  to  N.C.
Gen. Stat.  §  15A-979(b)  (2005).
The evidence at the suppression hearing tends to show that on
11  December  2004,  Officer  Dave  Cloutier  of  the  Goldsboro  Police




-2-
Department  was  driving  his  personal  vehicle  when  he  observed  a
vehicle ahead of him enter a curve at a  45 degree angle and almost
hit an oncoming vehicle.     Officer Cloutier continued to follow the
vehicle.    He  observed  the  vehicle  swerve  into  the  other  lane  and
off  the  right  side  of  the  road  several  times.      Officer  Cloutier
radioed for a deputy sheriff to assist because Officer Cloutier was
approaching the city limit boundary into the county outside of his
jurisdiction.    After  he  radioed  for  assistance,  Officer  Cloutier
observed the vehicle run off the right side of the road and almost
strike  a  guard  rail.    Officer  Cloutier  continued  to  follow  the
vehicle,  which  ultimately  parked  in  a  residential  driveway.
Officer  Cloutier  parked  his  vehicle  in  the  driveway  behind  the
suspect  vehicle.                                                              Defendant  exited  the  suspect  vehicle  and
approached  the  officer.     Officer  Cloutier  smelled  alcohol  on
defendant’s  person.     Officer  Cloutier  asked  to  see  defendant’s
driver’s  license.     Officer  Cloutier  chatted  with  defendant  for
several  minutes  as  he  awaited  the  arrival  of  a  deputy  sheriff  to
assist.   He held defendant’s driver’s license until Deputy Sheriff
Chuck Arnold subsequently arrived.   He informed Deputy Arnold what
he had observed.
Deputy  Arnold  testified  that  he  received  Officer  Cloutier’s
request  for  assistance.      Upon  his  arrival  at  the  scene,  Officer
Cloutier  related  what  he  had  observed.                                    Deputy  Arnold  asked
defendant whether he had been drinking.   Defendant admitted that he
had.    He administered an AlcoSensor test to defendant.    About two
to three minutes later Trooper Smith of the highway patrol arrived.




-3-
Trooper Smith arrested defendant.
Defendant  testified  that  when  Officer  Cloutier’s  vehicle
stopped  in  his  driveway,  he  went  to  see  who  it  was.     Officer
Cloutier asked him whether he had been drinking.    As he turned to
go  into  his  house,  Officer  Cloutier  told  him  to  stay  outside
because  a  sheriff’s  deputy  was  coming  to  talk  to  him.    He  waited
another  minute  or  two  and  started  to  go  into  his  house  again.
Officer Cloutier told him to wait because the sheriff’s deputy was
arriving.    He waited and cooperated with the sheriff’s deputy and
a  highway  patrol  trooper.     Officer  Cloutier  never  identified
himself as a law enforcement officer.
Defendant  argues  his  arrest  was  illegal,  and  therefore
unconstitutional,  because  a  police  officer  acting  outside  of  his
territorial  jurisdiction  conducted  the  initial  detention  and
investigation.
We  find  defendant’s  argument  is  flawed.    Evidence  must  be
suppressed  if  it  is  obtained                                               “as  a  result  of  a  substantial
violation  of  the  provisions”  of  Chapter  15A.    N.C.  Gen.  Stat.  §
15A-974(2) (2005).   A city law enforcement officer is authorized by
N.C. Gen. Stat. §  15A-402(c) to make an arrest “at any point which
is one mile or less from the nearest point in the boundary of such
city.”   N.C. Gen. Stat.  §  15A-402(c)  (2005).   Terry R. Pearsall, a
senior  planning  technician  with  the  City  of  Goldsboro  Planning
Department,  testified  without  contradiction  that  he  measured  by
computerized mapping the distance from the city limit boundary to
defendant’s residence.   He measured the distance as 5,140.70 feet,




-4-
which is less than  5,280 feet, the total number of feet in a mile.
Thus,   Officer   Cloutier   could   legally   arrest   defendant   at
defendant’s  residence.                                                    Even  if  the  arrest  occurred  beyond  one
mile outside of the city limit boundary, the fact the detention may
have been “illegal” did not make it unconstitutional.   See State v.
Eubanks,  283 N.C.  556,  560,  196 S.E.2d  706,  709  (1973)(“[N]othing
in our law requires the exclusion of evidence obtained following an
arrest which is constitutionally valid but illegal for failure to
first obtain an arrest warrant.”); State v. Pearson, 131 N.C. App.
315,                                                                       318,                                                          507  S.E.2d   301,                                              302                                                                   (1998)(arrest  by  officer  acting
                                                                                                                                                                                                         outside   of   his   territorial   jurisdiction   was   alone   not   “a
‘substantial violation’ of defendant’s rights.”).     An officer may
constitutionally approach a parked vehicle and question the driver-
occupant of the vehicle.      See State v. Brooks,  337 N.C.  132,  141-
42,                                                                        446  S.E.2d                                                   579,          585-86  (1994)(holding  officer’s  approach  of
parked vehicle and questioning of driver did not require reasonable
suspicion).                                                                “[A]  seizure  does  not  occur  simply  because  a  police
officer  approaches  an  individual  and  asks  a  few  questions.”
Florida  v.  Bostick,                                                      501  U.S.                                                     429,          434,                                              115  L.  Ed.                                                          2d                                   389,   398
(1991).
We affirm the order and judgment.
Affirmed.
Judges McGEE and HUNTER concur.
Report per Rule  30(e).

Download 06-712-5.pdf

South Carolina Law