State v. JB Daniel, 446 S.W.3d 809

On Sept. 16, 2009, Daniel was arrested after a traffic stop based on dispatch information that the vehicle had no insurance and the driver’s license may be suspended.
Sergeant Johnson requested dispatch to search the license plate; dispatch reportedly showed no insurance coverage on the vehicle.
Deputy Nowlin conducted the stop and Daniel admitted no insurance and produced an expired license.
Daniel was initially indicted for possession with intent to deliver; a first suppression motion in 2010 was denied.
In 2011 Daniel was indicted for engaging in criminal activity; the State dismissed the original possession indictment and later reindicted in 2012 for possession with intent to deliver; a second suppression motion was granted in 2013.
The State appealed the suppression order; the court applied a bifurcated standard of review and ultimately affirmed the suppression order based on stipulations that the insurance information was merely unconfirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there reasonable suspicion to stop based on unconfirmed insurance?	Daniel argues the unconfirmed insurance data is insufficient.	Daniel argues the information was unreliable for a Terry stop.	No; unconfirmed insurance is insufficient under the totality of circumstances.
Can reliance on the Financial Responsibility Verification Program alone support a Terry stop?	Daniel contends the program’s unconfirmed status cannot justify a stop.	State argues the unconfirmed data suffices.	No; stipulations show unconfirmed insurance does not meet reasonable suspicion.
Did the trial court abuse its discretion in granting the suppression?	State contends findings supported the stop; appellate deference applies.	Daniel contends the evidence failed to show reasonable suspicion.	No abuse of discretion; suppression affirmed.

United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (totality of circumstances governs reasonable suspicion for stop)
Ford v. State, 158 S.W.3d 488 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (reasonable suspicion standard in traffic stops)
Derichsweiler v. State, 348 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (totality of the circumstances governs reasonable suspicion)
Armitage v. State, 637 S.W.2d 936 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (traffic stop based on in-presence violation authority)
Walter v. State, 28 S.W.3d 538 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (reasonableness of detaining for investigation)
Garcia v. State, 43 S.W.3d 527 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (need not prove actual offense, just reasonable suspicion)
Gonzalez-Gilando v. State, 306 S.W.3d 893 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2010) (reliance on unavailable insurance information)
Contraras v. State, 309 S.W.3d 168 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2010) (reliance on insurance information unavailable)