AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant was observed by Officer Burge performing a U-turn across a painted center median in downtown Albuquerque, New Mexico, and subsequently speeding away. Upon being stopped, the Defendant appeared intoxicated to Officer Burge, who smelled alcohol. The Defendant was arrested and charged with DWI after failing field sobriety and chemical tests. He was also cited for violating Section 66-7-319 for crossing the painted median (paras 3-4).

Procedural History

• Metropolitan Court: Convicted the Defendant of DWI and violation of Section 66-7-319, denying the motion to suppress evidence on the basis that the officer had reasonable suspicion (para 5).
• District Court: Affirmed the Metropolitan Court's decision (para 5).

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment as Officer Burge did not have reasonable suspicion to believe a traffic violation occurred, specifically challenging the interpretation of Section 66-7-319 and the legality of the U-turn based on the painted median (paras 5, 6, 12).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Maintained that the officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct the stop, asserting that the painted median constituted an "intervening space" or a "clearly indicated dividing section" impeding vehicular traffic under Section 66-7-319, justifying the stop (para 5).

Legal Issues

• Whether an officer’s mistake of law can form the basis of reasonable suspicion to initiate a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment (para 9).
• Whether it was objectively reasonable for Officer Burge to believe that crossing over the painted median constituted a violation of Section 66-7-319, thus providing reasonable suspicion for the traffic stop (paras 12-17).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico affirmed the denial of the Defendant's motion to suppress evidence (para 18).

Reasons

• Majority Opinion by Judge Cynthia A. Fry, concurred by Judge Jonathan B. Sutin:
  The court concluded that even if Officer Burge was mistaken about the application of Section 66-7-319, his mistake was reasonable. It was determined that the officer had reasonable suspicion to pull the Defendant over based on the belief that the Defendant's maneuver violated the statute (paras 1, 11-17).
  The court referenced the United States Supreme Court decision in Heien v. North Carolina, which held that an officer’s reasonable mistake of law could support a finding of reasonable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment. The court found that the ambiguity surrounding the painted median and the applicable traffic laws supported the reasonableness of Officer Burge's mistake (paras 10-17).
  Dissenting Opinion by Judge Roderick T. Kennedy:
  Judge Kennedy dissented, arguing that the officer’s mistake of law regarding the legality of the U-turn under the circumstances was not objectively reasonable. He referenced Albuquerque Municipal Code § 8-2-6-10, which permits U-turns unless specifically prohibited by a sign, suggesting that the majority's reliance on the interpretation of "clearly indicated dividing section" to justify the stop was misplaced (para 20).