Commonwealth v. Mark A. Riedel, June 1, 2010
Extraterritorial Stop, Operating Under the Influence, Operating Negligently so as to Endanger
The defendant appealed the legality of an extraterritorial stop effectuated in Brewster by an Orleans police officer. The stop resulted in charges of operating while under the influence of intoxicating liquor (of which he was convicted) and operating negligently so as to endanger (of which he was acquitted). The trial court denied the defendant’s motion to suppress and the Appeals Court affirmed.
The issue is whether an officer’s lack of subjective belief that the defendant was committing an arrestable offense while in the officer’s jurisdiction precluded the officer from following the defendant into a neighboring jurisdiction in fresh and continued pursuit pursuant to G. L. c. 41, § 98A.
The Orleans officer had clocked the defendant going 13 miles over the speed limit. While pursuing the defendant, the officer observed the defendant cross the double-yellow center line, cross the fog line, and make an overly tight turn. The officer activated his blue lights in Orleans, but the defendant was finally stopped in Brewster. When the officer activated his blue lights, he did not believe the defendant had committed any arrestable offense.
The Court found the evidence of the defendant’s driving was objectively sufficient to give a reasonable officer reason to believe the defendant had committed the arrestable offense of OUI. Commonwealth v. O’Hara, 30 Mass. App. Ct. 608, 610 (1991). The officer’s subjective belief is not dispositive; the issue of whether the circumstances warranted pursuit requires an objective analysis. Id.
An objective view of the defendant’s actions provided reason to believe he had committed an arrestable offense; therefore, the Orleans officer had the authority, under G. L. c. 41, §98A, to pursue him into the neighboring jurisdiction.
- Prepared by AYK
