State of Iowa v. Jasmaine R. Warren
955 N.W.2d 848
Iowa2021Background
- Around 2:30 a.m., Officer Engle observed Jasmaine Warren park partially in a driveway with the rear of her vehicle protruding into the roadway in a posted no-parking area.
- Officers approached; Engle asked for license/registration and smelled a strong odor of marijuana and a faint odor of alcohol; he observed bloodshot, watery eyes and droopy eyelids.
- NCIC check revealed Warren’s license was revoked; she refused field sobriety tests, a preliminary breath test, and later a urine test at the station.
- Warren was charged with second-offense OWI (alternative theories under Iowa Code §321J.2(1)(a) and (c)) and driving while license revoked; she elected a bench trial and was convicted on both counts.
- The court of appeals reversed the OWI conviction and affirmed driving-while-revoked; the Iowa Supreme Court vacated the court-of-appeals reversal (finding sufficient evidence for OWI under §321J.2(1)(a)) and affirmed the judgment as to driving-while-revoked, holding counsel was not ineffective for failing to move to suppress.
- The Supreme Court held Officer Engle had probable cause to stop Warren for the parking violation and reasonable suspicion/probable cause to expand the stop based on the marijuana odor, signs of impairment, and the revoked-license discovery.
Issues
| Issue | Warren's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Was stopping Warren for a completed parking violation an unconstitutional seizure? | Parking violations should not justify a seizure; officer could have left a citation. | Officer had probable cause to stop because he witnessed a traffic violation (Iowa Code §321.358). | Held: No; witnessing the parking violation gave probable cause to stop. |
| 2. Did asking about intoxication unlawfully prolong the stop when a citation could have been issued instead? | Officer impermissibly expanded the stop to investigate intoxication rather than just issuing a ticket. | Questions about intoxication were reasonably related to the traffic enforcement mission and public-safety concerns. | Held: No; inquiries about license/registration and safety-related questions were permissible. |
| 3. Was obtaining Warren’s license and discovering it was revoked an unconstitutional extension of the stop? | Officer should have issued a parking citation and not detained her further; learning license status unlawfully extended the detention. | Checking ID/registration is routine and reasonable; discovery of revoked license provided reasonable suspicion of additional crime. | Held: No; requesting ID/registration was within scope and discovering revoked status justified expanding the investigation. |
| 4. Is there a legally meaningful distinction between parking and moving violations for Terry-stop purposes? | Parking violations should be treated differently and not justify similar seizures. | No meaningful distinction; traffic-code violations (including parking) can provide probable cause to stop. | Held: No categorical distinction under the Fourth Amendment in these circumstances; parking violations can justify a stop. |
Key Cases Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (traffic stop reasonable when officers have probable cause to believe a traffic violation occurred; pretext does not render stop unconstitutional)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (traffic stop must last no longer than necessary to effectuate its purpose; routine inquiries like license and registration are permissible)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
- State v. Myers, 924 N.W.2d 823 (Iowa 2019) (distinguishing OWI theories: prong (a) relies on conduct/demeanor; prongs (b) and (c) require test evidence)
- State v. Salcedo, 935 N.W.2d 572 (Iowa 2019) (scope of a traffic stop includes inquiries reasonably related to addressing the infraction and attendant safety concerns)
- United States v. Choudhry, 461 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2006) (officer’s observation of a parking violation can justify an investigatory stop)
- United States v. Johnson, 874 F.3d 571 (7th Cir. 2017) (no legally meaningful distinction between parking and moving violations for Terry-stop purposes)
- State v. Eubanks, 355 N.W.2d 57 (Iowa 1984) (odor of marijuana can provide probable cause to search or further investigate)
- Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001) (an officer may make a custodial arrest for a misdemeanor committed in the officer’s presence)