Stephen Nolan v. State of Mississippi
182 So. 3d 484
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- At ~1:56 a.m. officer observed Stephen Nolan following another vehicle closely, swerving, and striking the fog line; officer stopped him on suspicion of tailgating and/or unsafe driving.
- Officer smelled a strong odor of alcohol, noted bloodshot/glassy eyes and lethargy, and Nolan admitted drinking earlier; a PBT indicated alcohol.
- Officer administered HGN (6/6 clues), walk‑and‑turn (5/8 clues) and one‑leg‑stand (3/4 clues); Nolan was arrested and refused the Intoxilyzer 8000.
- Nolan pleaded no contest in municipal court, was convicted of DUI (common‑law DUI) and following too closely; convictions were affirmed through county and circuit courts.
- On appeal Nolan raised sufficiency and weight of the evidence, legality of the stop, improper use of his breath‑test refusal as evidence, and a vagueness challenge to the tailgating statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Nolan) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for DUI | Evidence did not show diminished ability to operate vehicle; no slurred speech, cooperative, stopped safely | Officer observed driving behavior, odor of alcohol, admissions, failed SFSTs and HGN; video corroborated | Conviction affirmed—evidence sufficient for common‑law DUI |
| Admissibility of refusal to take Intoxilyzer | Refusal was irrelevant if State failed to prove intoxication | Statute and evidentiary rules permit admission of refusal; relevant and admissible | Admission proper under Miss. Code Ann. §63‑11‑41 and evidentiary precedent |
| Legality of traffic stop (reasonable suspicion/probable cause) | Stop lacked objective basis | Officer articulated tailgating (unsafe distance) and facts supporting §63‑3‑619 violation | Stop lawful; officer had articulable reasonable suspicion/probable cause |
| Weight of the evidence (DUI & tailgating) | Verdicts contrary to overwhelming evidence; officer testimony inconsistent; Nolan calm/cooperative | Video, officer observations, admissions, and SFST failures support verdicts | No relief—verdicts not against overwhelming weight of evidence |
| Vagueness of tailgating statute (§63‑3‑619(1)) | Statute’s “reasonable and prudent” standard is vague and invites arbitrary enforcement | Comparable statutes upheld; statute gives factors (speed, traffic, road conditions) and fair notice | Statute is not unconstitutionally vague as applied; conviction stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for sufficiency and weight review)
- Young v. State, 119 So. 3d 309 (Miss. 2013) (definition of common‑law DUI when BAC unavailable)
- Saucier v. City of Poplarville, 858 So. 2d 933 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003) (upholding intoxication inference from odor, glazed eyes, failed SFSTs)
- Starkey v. State, 941 So. 2d 899 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (refusal to submit to chemical test admissible under Rule 402)
- Leuer v. City of Flowood, 744 So. 2d 266 (Miss. 1999) (upholding subjective traffic statutes when applied with rules of the road)
- Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (U.S. 1983) (void‑for‑vagueness doctrine overview)
- Barrow v. State, 121 So. 3d 935 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (tailgating conviction supported by officer testimony)