931 N.W.2d 236
N.D.2019Background
- Hendrickson was charged with actual physical control of a vehicle while under the influence after a Taco John’s/911 caller reported a driver in the drive‑thru was “beyond, beyond, beyond drunk.”
- The 911 caller described slurred speech, eyes “on and off” and rolling back, gave vehicle description, license plate, and the driver’s name, and delayed giving the food to keep him on site.
- Police verified the vehicle description, license plate, and driver identity and stopped Hendrickson; officers did not observe suspicious driving before the stop.
- Hendrickson moved to suppress, arguing the caller’s report was vague and insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop.
- No evidentiary hearing was requested; the district court denied suppression on submitted briefs, audio of the 911 call, and video of the stop; Hendrickson conditionally pled guilty and appealed only the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop Hendrickson based on the 911 tip | Hendrickson: the 911 tip was vague, equivocal about intoxication, and lacked objective indicia; insufficient alone to justify a stop | State: the caller was an identified nearby eyewitness who gave detailed, corroborated observations (vehicle, plate, name, classic signs of intoxication) establishing reasonable suspicion | Court: Affirmed. The identified caller’s detailed eyewitness observations plus officer corroboration of vehicle and plate gave sufficient reasonable suspicion to stop |
Key Cases Cited
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (2014) (anonymous 911 tip reporting being run off road can supply reasonable suspicion when circumstances indicate reliability)
- State v. Miller, 510 N.W.2d 638 (N.D. 1994) (anonymous/dispatcher‑relayed tip insufficient without corroboration of suspicious conduct)
- State v. Knox, 2016 ND 15 (N.D. 2016) (informant reliability and identity affect reasonable suspicion analysis)
- Lies v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 2019 ND 83 (N.D. 2019) (an officer needs reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop a vehicle)
- State v. Broom, 2018 ND 135 (N.D. 2018) (standard of review for suppression rulings; deference to district court fact findings)