State v. Rahier
2014 ND 153
| N.D. | 2014Background
- On May 20, 2013, Deputy Ray Kaylor stopped a green Volkswagen Jetta driven by Jesse Lee Rahier after being told the car had repeatedly circled a two-block area where law enforcement officers live and had flashed high beams at a patrol car; an individual also ran past that patrol car.
- At the stop Rahier provided his license; while retrieving vehicle registration from the glove box a deputy saw a gun; Rahier did not have a concealed weapons permit.
- Rahier was arrested and charged with carrying a concealed weapon, hindering law enforcement, and disorderly conduct; he moved to suppress the gun and related evidence.
- At the suppression hearing other officers testified the Jetta had circled the area multiple times (reported as 8–12 times in an hour), followed patrol officers, recorded stops, and had been associated in the past with harassment and suspected vandalism; the record does not show Kaylor was informed of most of those details before he made the stop.
- The district court granted suppression, finding Deputy Kaylor lacked reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop the vehicle. The State appealed; the Supreme Court reviewed whether the stop was supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion under the totality of the circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic stop was supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion | The State: reports that the Jetta’s repeated circling, flashing high beams at a patrol car, following officers, and related prior harassment/vandalism provided reasonable suspicion to stop | Rahier: the stop lacked reasonable and articulable suspicion because Kaylor did not possess or articulate those corroborating facts when he initiated the stop | The Court affirmed suppression — Kaylor did not have reasonable and articulable suspicion because key information known to other officers was not communicated to him and the observed conduct alone did not justify the stop |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Miller, 510 N.W.2d 638 (N.D. 1994) (knowledge held by one officer is not imputed to another absent communication before the police action)
- United States v. Soto, 375 F.3d 1219 (10th Cir. 2004) (repeated circling can, under the totality of circumstances, indicate counter-surveillance linked to criminal activity)
- United States v. Askew, 403 F.3d 496 (7th Cir. 2005) (slow, repeated circling may support reasonable suspicion when combined with other corroborating information provided to experienced officers)