Gabriel Atkinson v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 899

Around 10:00 p.m., Deputy Tillman observed Gabriel Atkinson driving on a straight stretch of U.S. Highway 421 and saw Atkinson drift so that about one-quarter of his vehicle was over the right fog line, then correct toward the centerline.
After passing, the deputy turned around and followed Atkinson for about 3–4 minutes, during which Atkinson repeatedly rode with his right wheels on the fog line, drifted toward the centerline, and then back over the fog line when oncoming traffic approached.
The deputy stopped Atkinson, asked for license/registration, and Atkinson volunteered that he was a habitual traffic violator (HTV).
The State charged Atkinson with felony operating as an HTV; Atkinson moved to suppress evidence obtained from the stop (his identity and HTV status), arguing the stop lacked reasonable suspicion.
The trial court denied the motion; after a bench trial the court found Atkinson guilty. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reviewed whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the traffic stop was supported by reasonable suspicion	The State: Deputy observed repeated drifting onto the fog line over a protracted time on a straight road, supporting reasonable suspicion of impairment	Atkinson: Brief contact with the fog line or swerving within a lane (no traffic infraction) is insufficient for reasonable suspicion	Court: Totality of circumstances (repeated drifting over minutes on a straight road, deputy training/experience) supports reasonable suspicion; stop lawful
Admissibility of identity/HTV evidence obtained during the stop	State: Evidence admissible because stop was valid; HTV status also volunteered and/or independently discoverable	Atkinson: Evidence is fruit of an illegal stop and should be suppressed	Court: Evidence admissible; stop valid and Atkinson’s volunteered HTV status was independently discoverable

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes reasonable-suspicion standard for investigatory stops)
Clarke v. State, 868 N.E.2d 1114 (Ind. 2007) (traffic stop is a seizure; requires reasonable suspicion)
Wells v. State, 772 N.E.2d 487 (driving behavior consistent with intoxication can supply reasonable suspicion)
Barrett v. State, 837 N.E.2d 1022 (drifting onto fog line repeatedly supported investigatory stop)
Coleman v. State, 847 N.E.2d 259 (reasonable suspicion assessed by totality of the circumstances)
Robinson v. State, 985 N.E.2d 1141 (brief contact with fog line or swerving within lane ordinarily insufficient; totality-of-circumstances analysis)
Hanna v. State, 726 N.E.2d 384 (independently discoverable evidence or inevitable discovery exceptions to fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree)