State v. O'Connor
222 N.C. App. 235
N.C. Ct. App.2012Background
- Officer Staton stopped Defendant for speeding in a 25 mph zone and weaving within his lane based on his own observations after following him for a short time.
- The stop occurred in a high crime area near a housing project late at night; the officer had retrieved the vehicle owner’s Cary address from a database, which contributed to perceived suspicion.
- Defendant lacked a license on his person but provided a passport ID; after stopping, Officer Staton smelled alcohol and Defendant acknowledged drinking at least one beverage.
- Defendant declined a roadside breath test but completed field sobriety tests; there was contested testimony about eye contact and the officer’s stated motivations for the stop.
- Defendant challenged the stop as unlawfully investigatory; the trial court granted the suppression motion, and the State appealed.
- The appellate court remanded for the entry of an order with factual findings and conclusions of law due to conflicting testimony and absent findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by not summarily denying for lack of affidavit | State | O’Connor | discretionary, not reversible error |
| Whether the court failed to make essential findings of fact resolving conflicts | State | O’Connor | remanded for proper findings |
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion given conflicting testimony | State | O’Connor | cannot decide on the merits without findings; remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Styles, 362 N.C. 412, 665 S.E.2d 438 (N.C. 2008) (reasonable suspicion standard for traffic stops)
- State v. Buchanan, 353 N.C. 332, 543 S.E.2d 823 (N.C. 2001) (findings of fact conclusive on appeal if supported by competent evidence)
- State v. Brewington, 352 N.C. 489, 532 S.E.2d 496 (N.C. 2000) (standard for review of suppression orders; factual findings required)
- State v. McQueen, 324 N.C. 118, 377 S.E.2d 38 (N.C. 1989) (trial court discretion despite failure to file required affidavit)
- In re Hardy, 294 N.C. 90, 240 S.E.2d 367 (N.C. 1978) (may vs. must — statutory interpretation for discretion vs. mandatory duties)
- State v. Williams, 195 N.C. App. 554, 673 S.E.2d 394 (N.C. App. 2009) (requirement of findings when conflicts exist; bench rationale affects mandatory language)
- State v. Harvey, 78 N.C. App. 235, 336 S.E.2d 857 (N.C. App. 1985) (summary denial when no legal basis for motion)
- State v. McKinney, 361 N.C. 53, 637 S.E.2d 868 (N.C. 2006) (remand when findings are incomplete to allow proper review)