State of Maine v. Thompson

(

STATE OF MAINE UNIFIED CRIMINAL DOCKET
CUMBERLAND, ss. PORTLAND
Docket No. CR-19-1762

STATE OF MAINE )
)
V. ) ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION
) TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE
MICHAEL THOMPSON )
)
Defendant )

This matter came before the court on October 31, 2019 for hearing on Defendant's motion
to suppress, filed October 4, 2019. Defendant appeared with his attorney, Michael Whipple.
Assistant District William Barry represented the State. The court heard testimony from Officer
Jeffrey Edwards of the South Portland Police Department, and viewed a video recording of
Defendant's stop and field sobriety testing.
Defendant is charged with criminal operating under the influence and criminal speeding.
He contends that suppression is warranted on the ground that the arresting officer lacked
reasonable articulable suspicion to stop his vehicle and to administer field sobriety tests and lacked
probable cause to arrest him.
The court finds that Officer Edwards stopped Defendant's vehicle after the officer's radar
equipment detected that Defendant was driving 66 miles per hour in a 35 mile-per-hour zone.
When Officer Edwards approached the vehicle, he observed that Defendant's eyes were bloodshot
and watery, and that his speech was slurred. Officer Edwards then administered a series field
sobriety tests. On the so-called walk-and-tum and one-leg-stand tests, Defendant had difficulty
following Officer Edwards' instructions. The Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus ["HGN"] test revealed
six indicia of intoxication.
The standard in such cases is well-established: An officer may undertake field sobriety
testing "if at the time the officer has an articulable suspicion, objectively reasonable in light of all
the circumstances, that the object of the search has committed or is about to commit a crime." State
v. King, 2009 ME 14, ,-[ 6, 965 A.2d 52, 54 (citing State v. Wood, 662 A.2d 919, 920 (Me. 1995)).
For there to be probable cause to arrest someone for operating under the influence, an officer "must
have probable cause to believe that the person's senses are affected to the slightest degree, or to

1
REC D CUMB CLERKS OFC
N0 1J 21 '19 F'Ml:09 .
,,
any extent, by the alcohol that person has had to drink." State v. Webster, 2000 ME 115, ,i 7, 754
A.2d 976, 978.
The court finds that Officer Edwards had reasonable articulable suspicion for stopping
Defendant's vehicle and for administering the field sobriety tests. Officer Edwards stopped
Defendant's vehicle after the officer's radar equipment showed Defendant to be traveling well
above the speed limit, and when he approached the vehicle he observed that Defendant's eyes were
bloodshot and watery and that he was slurring his words. Officer Edwards had probable cause to
arrest Defendant for criminal speeding as well as for criminal OUI.
Accordingly, because none of Defendant's grounds for suppression has merit, Defendant's
Motion to Suppress is DENIED.

DATED: ((/zr
--- ({'1
,---+-1-~- ­ - -- 1a Woodman
0
,,,

Judge, Unified Criminal Docket

2