Opinion
No. MV 02 0209585
April 2, 2003
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
The sole issue before the Court is whether the arresting officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop of the defendant Gerry Eisenlohr. The Court finds that the facts of this case are controlled by the Appellate Court's decision in State v. Bolanos, 58 Conn. App. 365 (2000).
In Bolanos, supra, the arresting officer was informed by dispatch that an employee of a restaurant reported that an intoxicated individual had just driven from the premises. The employee was unnamed. The employee did provide dispatch with the make, model and manufacture of the defendant's car as well as the direction in which the vehicle was proceeding. The arresting officer spotted the vehicle and followed it for approximately one mile noting no irregular or erratic behavior. The officer then stopped the vehicle at a safe place. Once stopped, the officer observed that the driver (the sole occupant) appeared to be intoxicated. After administering field sobriety tests, the defendant was arrested for operating his motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 14-227a.
Based on the above facts the defendant filed a motion to suppress all of the evidence that had been obtained pursuant to the stop on the grounds that the arresting officer did not have a reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop his car pursuant to Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). The trial court granted the motion to suppress. The State appealed.
The Appellate Court reversed the trial court concluding that the arresting officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the defendant committed or was about to commit a crime. The Court based its conclusion on three facts. First, although the informant's identity was unknown to the officer, said identity was readily ascertainable. In the instant case, the police officer knew the informant to be a local business man. The Court further observed "[m]oreover citizen informers are presumptively reliable if they are identifiable." (Cit. Omitted) State v. Bolanos, 58 Conn. App. at 369. Another factor was the ability of the informant as a layperson to form an opinion as to whether a person was intoxicated. In this proceeding, the informant reported to dispatch that he was following the suspect and observed him to be operating his vehicle in an erratic manner. The informant actually pointed out the vehicle to the arresting officer. This officer identified the informant to be a local business owner. Finally, the information provided by the informant was corroborated by the police officer's own observation as to the make, model, color of car and the direction in which it was proceeding. Similarly, the police officer in this case corroborated the make, model, color and license plate of the vehicle identified by dispatch.
The Court hereby concludes that the facts in this case are substantially similar to those recited in State v. Bolanos, 58 Conn. App. 365 (2000). The arresting officer could reasonably rely on the information provided to dispatch. As such, the police officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop of the defendant. The motion to suppress is denied.
The Court
Black, J.