State v. Meyer

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed the denial of Aria Meyer’s motion to suppress evidence obtained after an SDSU police stop. The court held that the stopping officer had an individualized and objectively reasonable suspicion of underage alcohol consumption and related criminal activity based on the totality of the circumstances. The court concluded that the stop did not violate the Fourth Amendment or Article VI, section 11 of the South Dakota Constitution.

Holdings

1. The magistrate court's finding that Officer Anderson made the stop was not clearly erroneous.
2. Officer Anderson had an individualized, objective, and reasonable suspicion that Meyer was engaged in criminal activity, so the investigatory stop did not violate Meyer's constitutional rights.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the magistrate court clearly erred in finding that Officer Anderson, rather than a student patrol officer, effectuated the stop.
2. Whether Officer Anderson had reasonable suspicion and an individualized, objective basis to stop Meyer and investigate suspected underage alcohol consumption and related criminal activity.

Disposition

affirmed