STATE v. KEEFE
2017 OK CR 3
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2017Background
- Ginna Keefe was charged with DUI (drugs) and unsafe lane use after a February 22, 2015 traffic stop on Highway 51 near the Tulsa/Broken Arrow boundary.
- Off-duty Tulsa officer Ryan Rogers observed Keefe weave, speed, and nearly hit barriers while following her home; he radioed Broken Arrow PD and intended to wait but activated lights and siren and stopped her after her driving became immediately dangerous.
- Broken Arrow Officer Chad Burden arrived, observed signs of drug impairment, Keefe failed field sobriety tests, was arrested, and gave a consensual blood sample (admitted Xanax use).
- Keefe moved to suppress, arguing the stop was unlawful because Rogers was outside his jurisdiction and acted as a private citizen who could not use police lights/siren or otherwise act under color of law.
- The trial court granted the suppression; the State appealed to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.
- The appellate court reversed, holding Rogers’ actions fell within a narrow public-safety exception allowing an officer outside jurisdiction to act under color of law when necessary to avert imminent danger, and also discussed inevitable discovery and private-arrest statutes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Keefe) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rogers, outside his jurisdiction, acted as a private citizen and thus could not use lights/siren or act under color of law to stop Keefe | Rogers acted as a private person authorized to arrest under 22 O.S. §202; alternatively, public-safety/community-caretaker exceptions justified the stop | Rogers was outside his jurisdiction and therefore could only act as a private citizen and not under color of law; use of lights/siren rendered the stop unlawful | Reversed suppression: court adopted a narrow public-safety exception allowing an officer outside jurisdiction to act under color of law when (1) urgency precludes other options, (2) immediate danger exists, (3) officer's primary motive is safety, and (4) use of authority is minimal and necessary |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Kieffer-Roden, 208 P.3d 471 (Okla. Crim. App. 2009) (officer outside jurisdiction may act as private person under §202; facts implied stop under color of law for public safety)
- Phipps v. State, 841 P.2d 591 (Okla. Crim. App. 1992) (officer outside jurisdiction may not act under color of law absent an applicable exception)
- United States v. Sawyer, 92 P.3d 707 (Okla. Crim. App. 2004) (general rule that officer authority does not extend beyond jurisdiction except narrow exceptions)
- Underwood v. State, 252 P.3d 221 (Okla. Crim. App. 2011) (public-safety exigency can justify departures from usual constitutional rules)
- Coffey v. State, 99 P.3d 249 (Okla. Crim. App. 2004) (warrantless entry justified by immediate need to protect life or avoid serious injury)
- Jackson v. State, 146 P.3d 1149 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006) (police actions limited and aimed at rescue rather than investigation support public-safety justification)