State v. Kerwick
353 S.W.3d 911
Tex. App.2011Background
- Officer Bradford was dispatched at 12:19 a.m. to a bar for a report of a fight in Fort Worth.
- Upon arrival, there were several people outside the bar; Bradford spoke with a person he believed called the police and saw a damaged vehicle.
- That person pointed to a street vehicle and said, 'There they are right there, there they are.'
- As the referenced vehicle began moving away, Bradford yelled for the driver to stop, detaining Kerwick without a warrant.
- Kerwick was charged with driving while intoxicated; she moved to suppress the detention as unconstitutional.
- The trial court granted the suppression motion, and the State appealed the ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the detention supported by reasonable suspicion? | Kerwick: no reasonable suspicion existed. | Kerwick: Bradford reasonably suspected unlawful conduct. | Suppression affirmed; no reasonable suspicion established. |
| Did the State present objective facts to justify the stop? | Kerwick: facts were insufficient and non-articulable. | Kerwick: facts alleged showed unusual activity and linkage to crime. | No objective articulable facts supported the stop. |
| Did the record contain adequate information to assess reasonableness under Terry and state law? | Kerwick: record lacks specific, articulable details. | Kerwick: totality of circumstances supports detention. | Record failed to provide objective basis for reasonable suspicion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford v. State, 158 S.W.3d 488 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (burden-shifting framework for suppressions and reasonable suspicion)
- Martinez v. State, 348 S.W.3d 919 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (totality of the circumstances in reasonable suspicion analysis)
- Derichsweiler v. State, 348 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (witness statements indicating unusual activity used to infer crime)
- Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (U.S. Supreme Court 1990) (totality of the circumstances standard for informant reliability)
- Crain v. State, 315 S.W.3d 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (requires more than a hunch for reasonable suspicion)
- Wiede v. State, 214 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (credibility and weight in historical fact findings)