State v. Johnson

Docket No. 20180349
Oral Argument: Thursday, March 28, 2019 10:30 AM

Docket Info

Title
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Lucas Michael Johnson, Defendant and Appellant
Case Type
CRIMINAL APPEAL : DRUGS/CONTRABAND
Appeal From
Case No. 2018-CR-01003
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
James S. Hill

Parties' Statement of Issues

  • Appellant

    The district court erred by failing to grant Mr. Johnson's motion to suppress in response to illegal seizure which was not supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion.

  • Appellee 1

    Whether the law enforcement officers had reasonable and articulable suspicion to detain Johnson for traffic offenses.


Summary

Lucas Michael Johnson appeals from a criminal judgment entered after he conditionally pled guilty to unlawful possession of a controlled substance and unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia.

In February 2018, Johnson was charged with two drug-related offenses after officers pulled him over, performed a search of his car, and located drugs and drug paraphernalia. Before the scheduled trial, Johnson moved to suppress all evidence seized from his car during the search, claiming he was unlawfully seized without reasonable and articulable suspicion in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 8 of the North Dakota Constitution. The State opposed Johnson’s motion and a hearing was held where one of the law enforcement officers present during Johnson’s stop testified. During the hearing, the officer testified that before stopping Johnson, he observed Johnson’s vehicle driving “a little bit over the speed limit,” and later pulling off the road onto the shoulder of the roadway without signaling. Following the hearing, the district court entered an order denying Johnson’s motion to suppress, finding the officer’s testimony that he observed two traffic violations gave the officers reasonable and articulable suspicion Johnson had violated the law, thereby supporting an investigatory stop.

On appeal, Johnson argues the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence because the traffic violations observed by the testifying officer would not give a reasonable officer an objective manifestation that Johnson was about to be engaged in unlawful activity or reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot.


Briefs

Filing Date Description
01/14/2019 APPELLANT BRIEF View
01/22/2019 APPELLEE BRIEF View

Counsel

Party Type Name
APPELLANT COURT APPOINTED Yancy Baron Cottrill - 08006
APPELLEE ASST. CITY ATTORNEY Justin Jon Schwarz - 05784

(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)

Seq. # Filing Date Description Attachment
1 09/17/2018 NOTICE OF APPEAL : 09/17/2018
2 09/17/2018 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 09/18/2018
3 09/17/2018 NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.
4 09/17/2018 Notice served on Yancy B. Cottrill and Derek Steiner
5 10/16/2018 ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED OCTOBER 15, 2018 (ENTRY NOS. 1 - 46)(not rec'd #20)
6 11/07/2018 ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED AUGUST 13, 2018 & C.O.S.
7 12/26/2018 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
8 12/26/2018 E-FILED MOTION
9 12/27/2018 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE - Granted : 01/16/2019
10 01/14/2019 APPELLANT BRIEF View
11 01/14/2019 E-FILED BRIEF (PDF)
12 01/14/2019 APPELLANT APPENDIX
13 01/14/2019 E-FILED APPENDIX (PDF)
14 01/22/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of ATB back form Central Duplicating
15 01/22/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of ATA back from Central Duplicating
16 01/22/2019 APPELLEE BRIEF View
17 01/22/2019 E-FILED BRIEF (PDF)
18 01/22/2019 APPELLEE APPENDIX
19 01/22/2019 E-FILED APPENDIX
20 01/25/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of AEB back from Central Duplicating
21 01/25/2019 Rec'd 6 copies of AEA back from Central Duplicating
22 01/28/2019 Rec'd $25 e-filing surcharge for ATB and ATA through IDB
23 02/19/2019 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT
24 02/25/2019 Rec'd $25 e-filing surcharge for AEB