A highway patrol officer had reasonable suspicion to justify stopping a vehicle for suspected drunken driving based solely on a 911 call from a motorist complaining that the vehicle had just run her off the road, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled April 22 (Prado Navarette v. California, 2014 BL 110716, U.S., No. 12-9490).
Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said the police officer did not need personally to witness anything suspicious before pulling over the driver to investigate because the totality of the circumstances surrounding the 911 call gave him all the justification he needed. ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.