State v. Heitzmann

632 N.W.2d 1 (N.D. 2001) · Supreme Court of North Dakota · July 20, 2001 · No. No. 20010017

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed Craig Heitzmann's conviction for possession of a controlled substance following his conditional guilty plea. The court held that the officer reasonably conducted a Terry frisk and limited pocket search during a vehicle stop based on circumstances indicating Heitzmann might be armed and dangerous. The court also concluded that the officers' use of force after Heitzmann fled did not convert the investigative detention into an illegal arrest.

Court
Supreme Court of North Dakota
Writing for the Court
Kapsner, Justice; Gerald W. Vande Walle, C.J.; Dale V. Sandstrom; William A. Neumann; Mary Muehlen Maring
Jurisdiction
North Dakota
Decision date
July 20, 2001
Docket number
No. 20010017
Procedural posture
Craig Heitzmann appealed from a conviction for class C felony possession of a controlled substance entered after his conditional guilty plea. He reserved the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress contraband seized during a roadside encounter.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court defers to the trial court's findings of fact and resolves conflicts in testimony in favor of affirmance when sufficient competent evidence supports the findings and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. Questions of law are fully reviewable.
Precedential value
Published opinion; precedential decision of the Supreme Court of North Dakota.
Parties
Craig Heitzmann v. State of North Dakota
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

suppression of evidencefourth amendmentsearch and seizurecriminal procedureappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawevidenceappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the officer lawfully ordered Heitzmann, a passenger, out of the vehicle while conducting a search incident to the driver's arrest.
  2. Whether the officer had an articulable and reasonable suspicion that Heitzmann was armed and dangerous sufficient to justify a Terry frisk.
  3. Whether the officer's removal of the contents of Heitzmann's jacket pockets, wallet, and money exceeded the permissible scope of a protective frisk.
  4. Whether the officer's physical restraint, the subsequent takedown, and handcuffing converted the investigative detention into an arrest unsupported by probable cause.
  5. Whether the search and seizure violated N.D.C.C. § 29-29-21.

Holdings

  1. An officer may order a passenger out of a lawfully detained vehicle to safely and thoroughly conduct a search of the passenger compartment incident to the driver's arrest; doing so did not violate Heitzmann's Fourth Amendment rights.
  2. A law enforcement officer may frisk a person during an investigative detention when the officer possesses an articulable suspicion that the person is armed and dangerous. The officer had that suspicion here.
  3. When an outer-clothing pat-down reveals bulges or objects whose size and density reasonably suggest that they may be weapons, the officer may continue the search into the inner garments or have the detainee remove pocket contents to verify whether the objects are weapons. Under the circumstances, removing Heitzmann's jacket-pocket contents, wallet, and money was reasonable.
  4. The officer's physical restraint of Heitzmann, pursuit, takedown, and handcuffing did not convert the permissible investigative detention into an illegal arrest.
  5. N.D.C.C. § 29-29-21 does not apply to investigatory stops of motor vehicles, and its listed reasons for a stop are not exclusive of stops based on reasonable suspicion.

Key quotations

The officer need not be absolutely certain that the individual is armed; the issue is whether a reasonably prudent man in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger. (¶ 11)
A pocket search is distinct from a pat-down search. (¶ 13)
These cases illustrate that, when faced with threatening conduct by a suspect during a Terry frisk, officers are entitled to take reasonable action to protect themselves, which may involve an immediate intrusive search of the suspect. (¶ 16)

Factual background

A police officer stopped a pickup driven by Chris Jacobson, arrested Jacobson for driving with a suspended license, and prepared to search the passenger compartment incident to the arrest. Passenger Craig Heitzmann appeared nervous, was on probation, and was reported by a deputy to have recently received methamphetamine and to have become agitated during an earlier probation search. Jacobson reported an unloaded pistol somewhere in the vehicle. During the officer's pat-down of Heitzmann, Heitzmann made evasive movements and attempted to move around the vehicle; the officer removed a wallet and a large amount of money from Heitzmann's pockets, after which Heitzmann fled and was restrained. Heitzmann then stated that his wallet contained methamphetamine, which officers seized.

Procedural history

A Valley City police officer stopped a pickup after learning the driver was operating under suspension, arrested the driver, and began a vehicle search incident to the arrest. The officer ordered passenger Heitzmann out of the vehicle, frisked him, removed items from his pockets, and discovered methamphetamine in his wallet after Heitzmann stated that it contained 'crank.' Heitzmann moved to suppress the contraband, but the trial court denied the motion. He then entered a conditional guilty plea under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2), and the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…