Brian Vincent Robinson v. State
03-15-00098-CR
Tex. App.May 19, 2015Background
- On Sept. 25, 2012, Sgt. Tyler McEowen stopped a 2006 silver Audi driven by Brian Robinson after observing what McEowen testified was a failure to signal within 100 feet before turning. McEowen had earlier been told the vehicle (temporary tag) was linked to narcotics activity.
- During the stop Robinson told the officer he had no valid driver’s license; an inquiry led to Robinson’s arrest for driving while license suspended.
- Following arrest, McEowen searched Robinson incident to arrest and recovered a white powdery substance that field-tested positive for cocaine; later lab analysis confirmed cocaine under 1 gram.
- Robinson was indicted for possession of cocaine (state jail felony), moved to suppress evidence from the traffic stop, and the trial court denied the motion without making express factual findings.
- Robinson was convicted after a jury trial and sentenced to two years in state jail; he appealed arguing the stop lacked probable cause because a literal reading of Tex. Transp. Code §545.104 (signal 100 feet before turn) produces absurd results and the officer lacked contextual grounds to cite a violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic stop was lawful under Tex. Transp. Code §545.104 where officer testified driver failed to signal within 100 feet | Robinson: literal reading of §545.104 produces absurd results in some situations; no evidence driver could have signaled 100 feet prior or had choice to avoid the turn — thus no probable cause to stop | State (via officer): Observing the failure to signal within 100 feet provided probable cause for a traffic stop; officer’s subjective motivations are irrelevant to legality of the stop | Trial court denied suppression (upheld stop); appeal argues this was error and the court should consider extracontextual factors rather than strict literal reading |
Key Cases Cited
- Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) (traffic stops are seizures under the Fourth Amendment)
- United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973) (lawful arrest supports search incident to arrest)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (pretextual stops are permissible if objective probable cause for traffic violation exists)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (review of reasonable suspicion/probable cause mixed questions reviewed de novo)
- Garcia v. State, 827 S.W.2d 937 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (officer may stop motorist for observed traffic violation)
- Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (de novo review of probable cause and reasonable suspicion determinations)
- Oles v. State, 933 S.W.2d 103 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (abuse-of-discretion standard for suppression rulings)
- Carmouche v. State, 10 S.W.3d 323 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (appellate review framework when trial court makes no explicit factual findings)
- Boykin v. State, 818 S.W.2d 782 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (contextual/pragmatic statutory interpretation principles referenced for traffic-signal issues)