State v. Blier, 162 A.3d 829

Background

On June 14, 2015, an officer observed a car with defective license-plate lights, activated flashing headlights, and followed the car about 860 feet until it turned into a driveway.
The driver (Blier) parked, exited, went to his house, entered an enclosed porch, and began to unlock the door; the officer followed onto the porch and spoke to him over the open threshold.
The officer told Blier he was effecting a traffic stop and said Blier needed to come outside to produce license, registration, and insurance; Blier walked back to his car to retrieve documents.
While standing over Blier at the car, the officer smelled alcohol, conducted field sobriety tests, and arrested Blier for OUI.
The motion court granted Blier’s motion to suppress, concluding the verbal order to exit the house was an unlawful seizure (no probable cause for arrest and no exigency); the State appealed and this Court reviewed de novo.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officer’s verbal order to come outside and the ensuing detention constituted an unlawful seizure/arrest across the home threshold	Blier: verbal command to exit home was a seizure without probable cause; officer lacked probable cause and no exigency justified crossing the threshold	State: officer had lawful basis to pursue and detain after Blier ignored police signals and entered his home; probable cause existed for failure-to-stop	Held: Court vacated suppression — officer had probable cause to arrest for failure to stop, so seizure was lawful
Whether probable cause existed to arrest for failing to stop for a law enforcement officer	Blier: conduct (parking and entering home) did not establish a crime; officer’s subjective belief insufficient	State: objective facts — flashing lights, continued following, failure to pull over, entering home with cruiser behind — supported probable cause for failure-to-stop	Held: Probable cause existed under objective standard; low threshold satisfied
Whether the investigatory stop transformed into an unlawful de facto arrest requiring suppression	Blier: officer’s actions exceeded investigatory scope and became an arrest without probable cause	State: even if stop exceeded, probable cause supported arrest for failure-to-stop, so evidence is admissible	Held: Because probable cause existed, any de facto arrest was lawful and suppression was improper
Procedural sufficiency of State’s notice of appeal	Blier: State’s notice lacked explicit written or stated oral AG approval	State: AG had given written approval prior to filing; statutory provisions should be liberally construed	Held: Court admonished State to comply strictly but declined to dismiss appeal because written approval existed and liberal construction applied

Key Cases Cited

State v. Collier, 66 A.3d 563 (establishing view-of-evidence standard for suppression hearing)
State v. Bailey, 41 A.3d 535 (de novo review when suppression order based primarily on undisputed facts)
State v. Donatelli, 995 A.2d 238 (investigatory-stop standard and when detention becomes an arrest)
State v. Flint, 12 A.3d 54 (probable cause analysis; arrest lawful if probable cause exists)
State v. Lagasse, 149 A.3d 1153 (probable cause defined as low-threshold objective standard)
State v. Pease, 520 A.2d 698 (officer may pursue immediately and continuously from scene into curtilage in certain circumstances)
State v. Gulick, 759 A.2d 1085 (Article I, section 5 of Maine Constitution affords same protections as Fourth Amendment)