NCJ Number
75720
Journal
Texas Bar Journal Volume: 42 Dated: (September 1979) Pages: 695-700
Date Published
1979
Length
6 pages
Annotation
A criminal defense attorney's strategy for challenging police motives during a random license check stop is outlined, with regard to the holdings of Talbert v. State and Fatemi v. State.
Abstract
Particular attention is given to the State's need to elect between proving reasonable suspicion or showing license check authority to justify a vehicle stop; methods of proving ulterior police motives in a license check stop; possible misapplication of article 6687b, section 13 (Vernon 1977), allowing for license check stops; and the growing case for judicial elimination of random license check authority. The Fatimi decision caused the prosecutor to have to elect at the pretrial stage between approaching a vehicle stop as one based on specific facts amounting to reasonable suspicion (as outlined in Talbert v. State) or as a random license check stop authorized by Fatemi. After Fatemi, once the State advances the license check justification; proof of any other police motive for a stop negates the license check authority. Both Hall v. State and Faulkner v. State advance the rule that the court will invalidate a license check stop that was made for some reason other than to check a vehicle operator's license. If the officer admits in court to stopping the vehicle for any reason other than a random license check, the stop is illegal. The Fatemi decision requires that a defendant show only that the police had a motive in stopping the vehicle that was in addition to the license check. In any defense to uncover motives for stopping a vehicle other than or in addition to a license check, it is important to develop fully the events preceding, during, and following the vehicle stop. A checklist is provided for the development of such a defense. Notes are provided.