State v. Cortez
543 S.W.3d 198
| Tex. Crim. App. | 2018Background
- Cortez was stopped by a State Trooper who testified he observed Cortez's minivan touch or cross the right "fog line" (white edge line) twice and stopped the vehicle; drugs were found during a subsequent search.
- Trial court granted Cortez's motion to suppress, finding (1) video did not clearly show the vehicle crossed the outer edge of the fog line, (2) mere touching of the fog line is not crossing onto the improved shoulder, and (3) even if the shoulder was entered, statutory exceptions applied.
- The court of appeals affirmed the suppression order, holding that touching the fog line does not equal driving on the improved shoulder.
- The State sought discretionary review arguing touching the fog line does constitute driving on the improved shoulder; the Court invoked judicial-economy review and resolved the case.
- The Court reviewed the stop under the Fourth Amendment reasonable-suspicion framework, applying deferential review to historical findings and de novo review to legal application and the totality-of-circumstances question.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Cortez) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Cortez's vehicle actually touched/crossed the fog line such that a stop was justified | Trooper reasonably observed the vehicle cross/touch the fog line (supported by his testimony and dashcam) | Video does not clearly show the tires crossed the outer edge; touching is disputed | The record does not clearly show the vehicle crossed the fog line; touch/crossing was debatable and the trial court's factual findings were supported |
| Whether touching the fog line constitutes "driving on the improved shoulder" under Tex. Transp. Code §545.058(a) | Fog line is part of the shoulder, so touching it is driving on the improved shoulder | Momentary contact or touching the fog line does not equal driving on the improved shoulder | Touching the fog line momentarily, without more, is not enough to constitute driving on the improved shoulder for purposes of reasonable suspicion; statute construed narrowly in favor of accused |
| Whether the Trooper had objectively reasonable suspicion to stop Cortez for driving on the improved shoulder | Officer had articulable facts (video and testimony) supporting reasonable suspicion to stop | No reasonable suspicion because the alleged conduct (touching line) was equivocal and lawful conduct may explain it | Under the totality of circumstances, Trooper lacked objectively reasonable suspicion; suppression affirmed |
| Whether, even if the shoulder were entered, statutory exceptions (e.g., allowing faster vehicle to pass; decelerating for right turn) justified the conduct | State argued exceptions did not apply to these incidents | Cortez argued the two observed events fit statutory exceptions (being passed; decelerating to exit) | Trial court findings that the statutory exceptions applied were supported by the record; even if contact occurred, it was permitted by §545.058(a)(5) and (a)(3) in the specific circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014) (officer’s reasonable mistake of law can supply reasonable suspicion if statute ambiguous)
- Lothrop v. State, 372 S.W.3d 187 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (section 545.058(a) exceptions mean driving on shoulder is not per se illegal; prosecution must show lack of necessity)
- Davison v. State, 405 S.W.3d 682 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (discussing circumstances when discretionary review court may resolve additional issues in interest of judicial economy)
- Cerny v. State, 28 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2000) (dashcam showing tires touching but not crossing fog line supported suppression for lack of reasonable suspicion)