Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dods v. State

October 6, 2010

TIMOTHY WILLIAM DODS, APPELLANT (DEFENDANT),
v.
THE STATE OF WYOMING, APPELLEE (PLAINTIFF).



Appeal from the District Court of Albany County, The Honorable Jeffrey A. Donnell, Judge.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hill, Justice

Before KITE, C.J., and GOLDEN, HILL, VOIGT*fn1, and BURKE, JJ.

HILL, J. delivers the opinion of the Court; VOIGT, J., files a specially concurring opinion.

[¶1] Timothy Dods appeals the denial of a motion to suppress evidence. Dods claims on appeal that a single instance of crossing a fog line does not create articulable suspicion to warrant a stop of his vehicle. We affirm.

ISSUE

[¶2] Dods' single issue is as follows:

Did the arresting officer possess sufficient facts to stop [Dods], and ultimately was there probable cause to search and seize [Dods] pursuant to Article 1 Section 4 of the Wyoming Constitution?

FACTS

[¶3] On May 26, 2008, State Trooper Karl Germain noticed a blue minivan traveling eastbound on Interstate 80 west of Laramie, Wyoming. Trooper Germain observed the minivan's passenger side tires cross the white fog line by approximately eight inches for about five seconds/several hundred yards. The trooper, who was traveling westbound, crossed the median, pursued the minivan, and initiated a traffic stop. Upon contacting Dods, the trooper smelled raw marijuana coming from the vehicle. Eventually, a search of the vehicle produced approximately 60 pounds of marijuana.

[¶4] Dods was charged with one count of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and one count of felony possession of marijuana. He filed a motion to suppress, which the district court denied, finding that the trooper was authorized to initiate the stop. Dods subsequently entered a conditional plea of guilty to the charge of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, and this appeal followed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[¶5] In reviewing a trial court's decision after a motion to suppress, we have stated:

In reviewing a trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, we do not interfere with the trial court's findings of fact unless the findings are clearly erroneous. We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's determination because the trial court has an opportunity at the evidentiary hearing to assess the credibility of the witnesses, weigh the evidence, and make the necessary inferences, deductions, and conclusions. The constitutionality of a particular search is a question of law that we review de novo.

Latta v. State, 2009 WY 35, ¶ 10, 202 P.3d 1069, 1071 (Wyo. 2009) (citation omitted).

DISCUSSION

[¶6] Dods contends that crossing a fog line one time, ostensibly in violation of Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31-5-209(a)(ii) (LexisNexis 2009), does not create articulable suspicion enough to stop a driver. Conversely, the State argues that the stop was justified ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.