State v. Deviley

2011 ND 182 (N.D. 2011) · Supreme Court of North Dakota · September 15, 2011 · No. Nos. 20100289 & 20100326

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the criminal judgments against Timothy John Deviley and Ryan Steven Lee for possession of marijuana with intent to deliver. The court held that the defendants were lawfully detained after a traffic stop based on reasonable and articulable suspicion, and that the twenty-minute wait for a drug-detection canine did not create a de facto arrest. The court also held that Lee's charge was properly enhanced to a Class A felony under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(c)(11).

Court
Supreme Court of North Dakota
Writing for the Court
Dale V. Sandstrom, Justice; Daniel J. Crothers, Justice; Mary Muehlen Maring, Justice; Gerald W. VandeWalle, Chief Justice; Carol Ronning Kapsner, Justice
Jurisdiction
North Dakota
Decision date
September 15, 2011
Docket number
Nos. 20100289 & 20100326
Procedural posture
Defendants appealed from criminal judgments entered after conditional guilty pleas for possession of marijuana with intent to deliver. They reserved the right to appeal orders denying motions to suppress the marijuana evidence; Lee also appealed denial of his motion to reduce his charge from a Class A felony to a Class B felony.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court does not conduct de novo review of the district court's factual findings on a suppression motion. Findings are not reversed if, resolving testimonial conflicts in favor of affirmance, sufficient competent evidence supports them and the decision is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Whether the facts establish reasonable and articulable suspicion is a question of law.
Precedential value
Published North Dakota Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Timothy John Deviley, Ryan Steven Lee v. State of North Dakota
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

search and seizurefourth amendmentsuppression of evidencecriminal procedurestatutory interpretation

Practice areas

criminal lawcriminal procedureconstitutional lawcontrolled substances

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the defendants were unlawfully seized under the Fourth Amendment after the purposes of the traffic stop were completed because the officer lacked reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity.
  2. Whether the approximately twenty-minute wait for a drug-sniffing canine created a de facto arrest requiring probable cause.
  3. Whether Lee's possession of ninety-five pounds of marijuana was properly enhanced to a Class A felony under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(c)(11), notwithstanding the separate enhancement provision in N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23(1)(b).

Holdings

  1. The detention was supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the officer was justified in detaining Deviley and Lee after telling Lee he was "good to go" while awaiting the canine unit.
  2. The additional approximately twenty-minute wait for the drug-sniffing canine did not create a de facto arrest or otherwise make the detention unreasonable.
  3. Lee was properly charged with a Class A felony under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(c)(11). The separate 100-pound delivery enhancement in N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23(1)(b) did not preclude enhancement because Lee was convicted of possession with intent to deliver, not an actual delivery.

Key quotations

To determine whether a reasonable suspicion exists, we consider the totality of the circumstances and apply an objective standard, taking into consideration the inferences and deductions an investigating officer would make based on the officer’s training and experience. (¶ 8)
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution is violated by the continued seizure of a traffic violator after the purposes of the initial traffic stop are completed, unless the officer has reasonable and articulable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot. (¶ 9)
Under the common usage of the word “delivers,” a physical transfer of the item must occur. (¶ 21)

Factual background

In November 2010, Lee was stopped for speeding while driving on Interstate 94 with Deviley as a passenger. After issuing a warning ticket and telling Lee he was "good to go," the officer detained both men, based on nervous behavior, inconsistent travel accounts, limited luggage, an open energy drink, and Lee's limited knowledge about Deviley, until a drug-sniffing canine arrived. The canine indicated the presence of controlled substances, and officers found approximately ninety-five pounds of marijuana in the pickup. Lee was charged with a Class A felony under the statutory enhancement for possessing at least 500 grams of marijuana with intent to deliver.

Procedural history

A highway patrol officer stopped Lee's vehicle for speeding and, after completing the traffic-stop purposes, detained Lee and Deviley while awaiting a drug-sniffing canine. The district court denied their suppression motions and denied the motions to reduce the charges. Both defendants entered conditional guilty pleas and appealed. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the suppression rulings, Lee's enhanced charge, and the criminal judgments.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…