Wall, Lisa D.
PD-0693-15
| Tex. App. | Jul 9, 2015Background
- At ~2:00 a.m. in Denton County, Lisa Wall was observed at two intersections with flashing yellow lights: she paused unusually long at one, braked late and nearly stopped in the middle of the next, changed lanes and made a U-turn. Officer Corey Padgett then activated his lights and stopped her.
- Padgett testified that he had made prior DWI stops at that same flashing-yellow location, that the time/place (early morning near bars) was consistent with DWIs, and that upon contact Wall had glassy/red eyes, slurred speech, and the odor of alcohol; she later registered a .16 BAC.
- Wall moved to suppress evidence from the stop; the trial court denied suppression, explicitly finding Wall’s driving did not constitute reasonable suspicion of DWI but could justify a stop for traffic violations (disregarding a traffic control device or an overly wide U-turn).
- The Second Court of Appeals affirmed Wall’s DWI conviction, but held the trial court’s traffic-offense findings were unsupported by the record and concluded Padgett did have reasonable suspicion to stop for suspected DWI.
- Wall sought discretionary review, arguing the appellate court improperly upheld the denial of suppression on a theory (reasonable suspicion for DWI) that the trial court expressly rejected and that the record supports the trial court’s contrary factual findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wall) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held (Court of Appeals) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic stop was supported by reasonable suspicion of DWI | Wall: Padgett testified he did not suspect DWI until after contact; video and testimony support trial court finding that driving did not amount to reasonable suspicion of DWI | State: Padgett observed unusual driving (prolonged stop at flashing yellow, delayed/near-stop in middle of intersection, U-turn at 2 a.m. near bars) and articulated facts supporting reasonable suspicion | Court of Appeals: Padgett had reasonable suspicion to detain for suspected DWI and affirmed conviction on that basis |
| Whether appellate court could affirm denial of suppression on a theory the trial court rejected | Wall: Appellate court erred by upholding denial on DWI-suspicion theory when trial court found no such suspicion; trial court findings entitled to deference | State: Alternative bases can justify affirmance; appellate court may uphold under any correct theory supported by record | Court of Appeals: Affirmed denial of suppression based on its de novo review that reasonable suspicion existed for DWI despite trial court’s contrary factual findings |
| Whether the trial court’s traffic-offense findings (disregard of a control device / improper U-turn) were supported by the record | Wall: Video and testimony do not show a statutory violation; flashing yellow permits proceeding with caution; U-turn was not shown unsafe | State: Trial court found traffic violations as alternative justification for stop | Court of Appeals: Reversed trial court’s traffic-offense findings as unsupported by the record |
| Standard of review for reasonable suspicion when video and explicit findings exist | Wall: Trial-court factual findings (including from officer testimony) entitled to almost-total deference; appellate court should view evidence in light most favorable to trial court | State: Reasonable suspicion is a mixed question reviewable de novo as to application-of-law-to-fact; appellate court may reassess supported facts | Court of Appeals: Applied de novo review to reasonable-suspicion question and concluded record supports finding of reasonable suspicion for DWI |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes investigatory stop/reasonable-suspicion standard)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (objective-reasonableness; traffic stops valid if supported by probable cause or reasonable suspicion)
- Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47 (officers need objective facts to justify detention)
- Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (community-caretaking exception is separate from criminal investigation)
- Ford v. State, 158 S.W.3d 488 (Tex. Crim. App.) (burden-shifting and review standards for suppression)
- Abney v. State, 394 S.W.3d 542 (Tex. Crim. App.) (motion-to-suppress burdens and deference to trial court findings)
- State v. Kerwick, 393 S.W.3d 270 (Tex. Crim. App.) (reasonable suspicion characterized as mixed question of law reviewed de novo)