State v. Botts
25 Neb. Ct. App. 372
| Neb. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Late-night encounter (≈2:30 a.m.): Officer Drager found a vehicle partially blocking a street and contacted Kirk Botts, who was pushing the vehicle and said it had run out of gas.
- Earlier contact: Officer Tran had stopped Botts ~2½ hours earlier for traffic issues and detected a slight odor of alcohol and alcohol in the vehicle but did not initiate a DUI investigation.
- Scene escalation: After Tran returned to the scene and relayed his earlier contact, officers approached Botts; he became agitated, backed up against a light pole, was surrounded by four uniformed officers, and an officer drew a Taser. Officers ordered him to put his hands behind his back.
- Seizure, handcuffing, and search: Botts complied, was handcuffed and placed in Drager’s cruiser. Officers decided to tow the vehicle and conducted an inventory search, during which Tran found a machete under the driver’s seat.
- Post-arrest statements and prosecution: Botts made incriminating statements in the cruiser about ownership/use of the machete. He was charged with possession of a knife by a felon; the trial court denied motions to suppress and a jury convicted him. Sentence: 1 year imprisonment plus 1 year postrelease supervision.
Issues
| Issue | Botts' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the officers’ encounter became a seizure/arrest before handcuffing (timing of seizure) | He was seized when surrounded by four officers with a Taser drawn at the light pole; that constituted an arrest | No arrest until he was handcuffed; earlier conduct was not a seizure requiring probable cause | Court held seizure occurred at the light pole (surrounded, Taser displayed) — a tier-three encounter |
| Whether there was probable cause for the seizure/arrest | No probable cause for arrest (no reliable evidence he had driven while intoxicated; demeanor could be due to being denied help) | Officers had probable cause to suspect DUI based on Tran’s earlier contact (odor of alcohol and alcohol in vehicle) and Botts’ later agitation | Court held officers lacked probable cause at the time of seizure; arrest was unlawful |
| Admissibility of the machete and post-arrest statements (fruit of the seizure) | Evidence and statements were the fruit of an illegal arrest and should be suppressed | The machete was found during a valid inventory search incident to tow; statements were admissible | Court held the evidence and statements should have been suppressed as the seizure/arrest was unlawful |
| Other claimed errors (testimony objections, jury instruction, sufficiency) | Various trial errors asserted | State defended trial rulings | Court did not address these because suppression ruling disposed of case |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Woldt, 293 Neb. 265 (discusses standard of review for suppression and Fourth Amendment issues)
- State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265 (articulates tiered police-citizen encounters and when a seizure occurs)
- State v. Van Ackeren, 242 Neb. 479 (arrest requires probable cause)
- State v. McClain, 285 Neb. 537 (probable cause is assessed under totality-of-circumstances, objective standard)
- State v. Jedlicka, 297 Neb. 276 (appellate courts need not address unnecessary issues)
Decision: Reversed and remanded with directions to vacate conviction and dismiss the charge because the arrest and subsequent search/statements violated the Fourth Amendment.