Striving to find a \u201cbright line\u201d rule, driving on the line dividing lanes is not a lane violation in N.M. but weaving within a lane is at least reasonable suspicion of being \u201cfatigued or impaired.\u201d Handing a warning ticket and saying \u201chave a nice day\u201d and to \u201cbe safe,\u201d is permission to leave. Defendant\u2019s stopping to answer further questions was by consent. [And I have bridge in NYC for sale.] United States v. Bassols, 775 F. Supp. 2d 1293 (D. N.M. 2011)*:<\/p>\n
After Officer Lucero gave Bassols a warning citation for violating Section 66-7-317, Officer Lucero told Bassols to have a nice day and to be safe. Bassols then turned and walked back toward his vehicle. Because Bassols began to walk back toward his vehicle after Officer Lucero advised Bassols to \u201chave a nice day\u201d and to \u201cbe safe,\u201d the Court concludes that a reasonable person in Bassols\u2019 position would believe that he was free to leave the scene and terminate his encounter with Officer Lucero. While Bassols was walking away, Officer Lucero called out to Bassols and asked if Bassols would answer a few more questions. Officer Lucero did not order Bassols to return to Officer Lucero’s car and he did not order Bassols to answer any questions. Bassols turned around and walked back to Officer Lucero. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Talking with a CI is one way to assess reliability; another is to corroborate him. The fact some information in an affidavit is old does not make it stale. PC is determined from the totality of the information. United States v. Kavalchuk, 2011 DNH 55, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38284 (D. N.H. March 31, 2011).*<\/p>\n
The testimony of the officers is credited over the defendant\u2019s \u201cbald denial\u201d that she committed three traffic offenses before she was stopped and then officers found her DL suspended. United States v. Davis, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38483 (N.D. Ohio April 7, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading