Eduardo Salas Rael v. State
08-15-00063-CR
| Tex. App. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- Officer received a tip that a person (named Eduardo Sandoval) would be selling drugs on Camp Bowie Boulevard; officer was patrolling the area.
- Officer observed Appellant driving a small gray Acura and allegedly turn into a parking lot without signaling; officer initiated a traffic stop.
- Officer asked for ID and insurance, then requested consent to search; Appellant gave verbal consent.
- Officer called a canine unit before asking Appellant to exit, citing concern Appellant might withdraw consent; the dog alerted to the driver’s-seat area and officers found cocaine in the center console and on Appellant later at the jail.
- Dash-cam footage failed to record the initial stop (malfunction); recording begins when the canine unit arrived and Appellant exited the vehicle.
- Appellant moved to suppress; trial court denied the motion. Appellant pleaded guilty under a negotiated plea and received deferred adjudication; he appealed the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Rael's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of traffic stop and suppression of evidence | Stop was pretextual and officer not credible; challenged removal/search | Officer witnessed a traffic violation (no signal) giving reasonable suspicion; consent to search and canine alert justified search | Stop was valid; officer credible; motion to suppress denied |
| Requirement for written findings of fact on suppression ruling | Trial court erred by not issuing written findings | No request for written findings was made; court has no duty absent request | No error: no request was made, so trial court not required to file findings |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Cullen, 195 S.W.3d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (trial court must make written findings on suppression at losing party's request)
- Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (U.S. 1996) (standards for reviewing reasonable suspicion and probable cause)
- Guzman v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (bifurcated standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)
- Ford v. State, 158 S.W.3d 488 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (presumption of fact findings supporting suppression ruling when court issues no findings)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (U.S. 1996) (officer's subjective motive does not invalidate an objectively reasonable traffic stop)