Weer v. State
2010 MT 232
| Mont. | 2010Background
- Weer challenged the district court’s denial of his petition to reinstate his driver’s license after a DUI stop.
- Trooper Salois observed Weer weave toward and onto the double-yellow centerline on a straight two-lane road at 12:44 a.m.; he stopped Weer after activating lights and siren.
- Weer refused a preliminary breathalyzer; his license was suspended as a result.
- At the evidentiary hearing, the district court relied on Salois’s testimony and video to determine whether there was particularized suspicion for the stop.
- The district court denied reinstatement, holding Salois had sufficient particularized suspicion to stop Weer.
- Weer appeals, arguing the stop lacked particularized suspicion; the Montana Supreme Court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Salois have particularized suspicion to stop Weer? | Weer contends stops require a traffic offense or articulable violation. | State argues totality of circumstances supports suspicion even absent a specific violation. | Yes; sufficient particularized suspicion supported the stop. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gilder, 295 Mont. 483 (1999 MT 207) (establishes totality-of-the-circumstances for stops and particularized suspicion)
- Jess v. State ex rel. Rec. & Driver Cont., 347 Mont. 381 (2008 MT 422) (standard for reviewing reinstatement petitions; factual findings must be supported by substantial evidence)
- Widdicombe v. State ex rel. Lafond, 85 P.3d 1271 (2004 MT 49) (limits on when an investigatory stop is justified; focus on particularized suspicion)
- Lafferty, 291 Mont. 157 (1998 MT 247) (distinguishes cases where anonymous tips or minor deviations do not justify stops)
- Morris v. State, 18 P.3d 1003 (2001 MT 13) (distinguishes slight drifting from sufficient suspicion)
- Schulke v. Montana DOJ Motor Vehicle Div., 326 Mont. 390 (2005 MT 77) (addressing necessity of citing a specific statutory violation for stops)
- Koeppen v. Bolich, 79 P.3d 1100 (2003 MT 313) (upholds district court credibility determinations in appellate review)
- Boucher v. State, 980 P.2d 1058 (1999 MT 102) (forefend presumption and standards for stop validity within reinstatement context)