State v. Rivera, 901 N.W.2d 272

Background

At ~10:35 p.m. two conservation officers encountered two groups of people on a dark paved road in a recreation area; officers parked and exited their marked patrol vehicle.
Rivera approached in his truck, stopped behind the patrol vehicle, then pulled onto the grassy shoulder and advanced slowly past the patrol vehicle toward the groups.
An officer exited, walked around the front of the patrol vehicle toward Rivera’s truck in uniform (badge visible, firearm holstered but not drawn); the officer did not activate lights/siren, honk, draw a weapon, or physically block Rivera’s truck.
Rivera stopped his vehicle as the officer approached; the officer asked him to wait while the patrol vehicle was moved and observed bloodshot, watery eyes and slurred speech, and Rivera admitted drinking.
The officer then detained Rivera for a DUI investigation; Rivera moved to suppress evidence, arguing the stop was unlawful. Lower courts denied suppression relying on the community caretaking exception; Nebraska Supreme Court granted review.

Issues

Issue	Rivera's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the initial police-citizen encounter was a Fourth Amendment seizure	Rivera contended the officer caused him to stop, making it a seizure that required justification	State maintained the stop was voluntary (a consensual, first-tier encounter) or justified under community caretaking	Held: No seizure occurred at the encounter's start; Rivera voluntarily stopped and a reasonable person would have felt free to leave
Whether the community caretaking exception justified the officer’s contact/detention	Rivera argued the Court of Appeals improperly expanded the exception and it shouldn't apply	State argued the officer acted in a community caretaking role to ensure public safety near groups on the road	Held: Community caretaking analysis was unnecessary because there was no initial seizure; lower courts reached correct result though via wrong reasoning
Whether the subsequent detention was supported by reasonable suspicion	Rivera argued detention lacked reasonable suspicion	State pointed to officer’s observations (bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, admission of drinking) as articulable facts	Held: The encounter escalated to a second-tier interaction based on observed signs, producing reasonable suspicion to detain for DUI
Whether suppression should be granted given the above	Rivera sought suppression of evidence obtained following the stop	State opposed suppression asserting proper escalation and reasonable suspicion	Held: Motion to suppress properly denied; conviction affirmed

Key Cases Cited

State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265, 899 N.W.2d 626 (defines encounter tiers and seizure standard)
State v. Bakewell, 273 Neb. 372, 730 N.W.2d 335 (community caretaking exception should be narrowly applied)
State v. Hedgcock, 277 Neb. 805, 765 N.W.2d 469 (seizure may result from show of authority; submission required)
State v. Lee, 290 Neb. 601, 861 N.W.2d 393 (appellate review does not reweigh witness credibility in suppression findings)
State v. Avey, 288 Neb. 233, 846 N.W.2d 662 (Fourth Amendment seizure principles)
State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448, 755 N.W.2d 57 (officer’s subjective intent irrelevant to seizure analysis)
State v. Kolbjornsen, 295 Neb. 231, 888 N.W.2d 153 (correct result will not be set aside solely because lower court used wrong reasoning)