State v. Rivera
297 Neb. 709
| Neb. | 2017Background
- At ~10:35 p.m. in a very dark recreation area, two conservation officers found groups of people near a paved road. One officer parked a marked patrol truck on the right side and exited to investigate; the other officer returned to the patrol vehicle to call dispatch.
- Jonathan Rivera approached in a vehicle, pulled onto the grassy shoulder to the right of the patrol truck, and proceeded slowly past it; if he had tried to pass on the left he still would have left the paved portion of the road.
- An officer (in uniform, badge visible, holstered firearm) walked around the front of the patrol truck toward Rivera’s vehicle; Rivera stopped his truck when the officer approached and the group of people was about 15–20 feet away.
- The officer told Rivera he would move the patrol vehicle if Rivera would wait a few minutes; the officer observed signs of intoxication (bloodshot, watery eyes, slurred speech) and Rivera admitted to drinking; the officer then detained Rivera for a DUI investigation and ultimately arrested him.
- Rivera moved to suppress evidence obtained from the stop; the county court denied the motion applying the community-caretaking exception, and the district court and Court of Appeals affirmed; the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review.
Issues
| Issue | Rivera's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the initial police-citizen encounter was a Fourth Amendment seizure | Rivera: The encounter was a seizure, so community-caretaking exception should be narrowly applied and does not justify the stop | State: The officer’s approach and conduct were lawful; community-caretaking or subsequent investigative detention justified the actions | Court: No seizure occurred at the encounter’s commencement; Rivera voluntarily stopped and initial contact was a consensual (first-tier) encounter |
| Whether the community-caretaking exception justified the officer’s contact | Rivera: Court of Appeals expanded the exception improperly | State: Exception supports the officer’s contact for public-safety reasons | Court: No need to apply community-caretaking because no seizure occurred; lower courts reached correct result though by wrong reasoning |
| Whether the officer’s observations provided reasonable suspicion for detention | Rivera: Initial contact invalid if seizure; evidence should be suppressed | State: Officer’s observations (eyes, speech, admission) gave reasonable suspicion for DUI detention | Court: After consensual contact escalated by observed impairment, reasonable suspicion existed and detention was lawful |
| Effect of lower courts’ reliance on incorrect legal theory | Rivera: Relief warranted due to erroneous application of exception | State: Correct outcome justifies affirmance despite reasoning | Court: Correct result need not be overturned even if lower court applied wrong reasoning; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bakewell, 273 Neb. 372 (narrow application of community-caretaking exception)
- State v. Rogers, 297 Neb. 265 (tiered police-citizen encounter framework)
- State v. Avey, 288 Neb. 233 (Fourth Amendment seizure requires person not free to leave)
- State v. Hedgcock, 277 Neb. 805 (show of authority vs. submission; seizure principles)
- State v. Lee, 290 Neb. 601 (appellate review does not reweigh credibility of witnesses)
- State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448 (officer’s subjective intent irrelevant to seizure analysis)
- State v. Kolbjornsen, 295 Neb. 231 (correct result will not be set aside for wrong reasoning)