Commonwealth v. Riggieri

438 Mass. 613 (2003) · Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts · January 30, 2003

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a police officer had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant’s vehicle based on a dispatcher’s report of erratic driving. The report was sufficiently reliable because the caller could reasonably be identified as an off-duty reserve police officer who was following the vehicle and providing contemporaneous updates. The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment admitting the evidence obtained after the stop.

Court
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Writing for the Court
Ireland, J.
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts
Decision date
January 30, 2003
Procedural posture
After a District Court jury convicted the defendant of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, the Supreme Judicial Court granted the Commonwealth's application for further appellate review of an Appeals Court decision that had reversed the conviction and ordered judgment for the defendant.
Standard of review
The court accepted the motion judge's subsidiary findings absent clear error and reviewed whether the facts established reasonable suspicion to justify the investigatory stop.
Precedential value
Published opinion of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court; precedential.
Parties
Commonwealth v. Riggieri
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal procedurefourth amendmentsearch and seizureprobable causesuppression of evidence

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional criminal procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether information relayed through a police dispatcher from an off-duty reserve police officer who was following the defendant provided sufficient indicia of reliability and basis of knowledge to justify an investigatory traffic stop.
  2. Whether evidence obtained after the traffic stop was properly admitted at trial.

Holdings

  1. The information relayed to Officer Haley was sufficiently reliable to establish reasonable suspicion for a threshold inquiry and to justify the traffic stop.
  2. Because the stop was justified by reasonable suspicion, the evidence obtained by Officer Haley after the stop was properly admitted at trial.

Key quotations

A police officer may stop a vehicle in order to conduct a threshold inquiry if he has a reasonable suspicion that the occupants have committed, are committing, or are about to commit a crime. (438 Mass. at 615)
His suspicion must be based on specific, articulable facts and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom. A hunch will not suffice. (438 Mass. at 615)
If a flyer or bulletin has been issued on the basis of articulable facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that the wanted person has committed an offense, then reliance on that flyer or bulletin justifies a stop to check identification ... to pose questions to the person, or to detain the person briefly while attempting to obtain further information (438 Mass. at 616)

Factual background

At approximately 1:30 a.m., a Westborough police dispatcher alerted Officer Richard Haley that a vehicle was being driven erratically and relayed its description, registration number, route, and continuing location. The information originated with an off-duty reserve Westborough police officer, Officer McLaughlin, who was following the defendant and providing updates through a cellular telephone call to the dispatcher. Haley located the vehicle, followed it approximately 400 yards, and stopped it without personally observing a traffic violation; McLaughlin arrived immediately after the stop.

Procedural history

The defendant moved before trial to suppress evidence or dismiss the complaints. The motion judge, who also presided over the trial, denied the motion, and the defendant was convicted. The Appeals Court reversed, concluding that the traffic stop lacked reasonable suspicion because the Commonwealth had not established the reliability of the informant. The Supreme Judicial Court granted further appellate review and affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…