Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

D.Ariz.: Analyzing officer's testimony in detail on basis for stop leads to conclusion he isn't believable; officer prone to "stray from the facts"; suppression granted

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

The arresting officer in this case just is not believable that he did not stop the defendant for pretextual reasons. United States v. Padilla, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45708 (D. Ariz. March 3, 2010)*: The Government need only show one traffic violation for a legitimate pretextual stop. As discussed above, there was no license plate light violation, speed violation, crossing the fog line violation or failure to pull over in response to the emergency lights. That Defendant Padilla in fact violated the seatbelt requirement is undisputed. What is disputed is whether Officer Henry knew about the violation before or after the stop. The timing of his knowledge rests solely on Officer Henry's credibility. As the investigating officer in this case, Officer Henry has an interest in the outcome of the case...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on May 13, 2010 (boomark / email).