Sturn v. Director, N.D. Dept of Transportation

20080199

Kevin John Sturn, Petitioner and Appellee
v.
Director, North Dakota
Department of Transportation, Respondent and Appellant

Appeal from:

District Court, South Central Judicial District, Morton County
Judge Thomas J. Schneider

Nature of Action:

Transportation Dept.

Counsel:

Appellant:		Michael Trent Pitcher , Att. General Office
Appellee:		Thomas M. Tuntland

Term:

12/2008 Argument: 12/22/2008 10:45am

ND cite:

2009 ND 39

NW cite:

763 N.W.2d 515

Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,^© a free download.

Issues:

Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
An officer must have a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a motorist is violating the law in order to legally stop a vehicle. Trooper Bohn saw Sturn's vehicle approaching him rather quickly. Believing Sturn was speeding, the trooper activated his radar unit and clocked Sturn's vehicle at 36 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone. Sturn objected to the radar reading on foundational grounds. The hearing officer overruled the objection. Was there sufficient grounds for the stop?

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Could a reasoning mind conclude that an officer had sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify a vehicle stop based solely on the officer's testimony that he saw a speed reading in excess of the posted speed limit on a radar device without some proof that the officer knew how to run the device, that the officer was actually running the device correctly or that the device appeared to be functioning properly?

Add Docket 20080199 RSS

Docket entries:

1	08/14/2008	NOTICE OF APPEAL: 08/13/2008
2	09/11/2008	RECORD ON APPEAL & Transcript of Testimony of Administrative Hearing
3	09/18/2008	DISK of Transcript of Administrative Hearing on 4-8-08 (e-mailed)
4	09/22/2008	APPELLANT BRIEF
5	09/22/2008	APPELLANT APPENDIX
6	09/22/2008	Affidavit of Service by Mail of ATB
7	09/22/2008	DISK - atb (e-mailed)
8	10/23/2008	APPELLEE BRIEF
9	10/23/2008	DISK - AEB
10	12/01/2008	MOTION FOR Continuance of argument by Appellant's counsel
11	12/02/2008	ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (oral argument has been continued to December 22 at 1:00 p.m.). Granted
12	12/22/2008	APPEARANCES: Michael T. Pitchell, Asst. Attorney General; Thomas M. Tuntland
13	12/22/2008	ARGUED: Pitcher; Tuntland
14	12/22/2008	ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
15	04/02/2009	DISPOSITION: REVERSED
16	04/02/2009	UNANIMOUS OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W.
17	04/02/2009	Costs on Appeal taxed in favor of Appellant
18	04/03/2009	Judgment E-Mailed to Parties
19	04/28/2009	MANDATE
20	05/07/2009	RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 06/19/2013