IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO Docket No. 47795 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) Filed: October 22, 2021 Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) Melanie Gagnepain, Clerk v. ) ) MELISSA MARIE WALKER, ) ) Defendant-Appellant. ) ) Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Michael J. Reardon, District Judge. Judgment of conviction for possession of a controlled substance and misdemeanor driving under the influence, affirmed. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Kimberly A. Coster, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. ________________________________________________ LORELLO, Judge Melissa Marie Walker appeals from her judgment of conviction for possession of a controlled substance and misdemeanor driving under the influence (DUI). We affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND During an early morning patrol through a residential neighborhood, an officer observed two vehicles parked on the roadside facing each other. The officer also observed Walker move away from the vehicle parked facing against traffic and enter the other vehicle. Without activating the patrol vehicle’s overhead emergency lights, the officer parked on the opposite side of the street and exited his patrol vehicle. Finding the illegally parked vehicle unoccupied, the officer approached Walker, who was sitting in the driver’s seat of the other vehicle with the motor running. 1 While talking to Walker, the officer observed that Walker’s eyes exhibited indicia of intoxication. The officer then requested identification from Walker and her two passengers. Walker said she did not have her wallet, but verbally provided her personal identifying information. Walker subsequently submitted to field sobriety testing, which indicated she was intoxicated. Walker also revealed she was in possession of controlled substances. The State charged Walker with two counts of possession of a controlled substance and misdemeanor DUI. Walker moved to suppress “all the evidence gathered as a result of an illegal seizure,” arguing that she was seized without reasonable suspicion when the officer requested her identification. The district court denied Walker’s suppression motion, concluding that no constitutional violation occurred. Walker entered conditional Alford1 pleas to one count of possession of a controlled substance, I.C. § 37-2732(c), and misdemeanor DUI, I.C. § 18-8004, preserving her right to appeal the denial of her suppression motion. In exchange for Walker’s guilty pleas, the State agreed to dismiss the other count of possession of a controlled substance. Walker appeals. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Generally, the standard of review of a suppression motion is bifurcated. When a decision on a motion to suppress is challenged, we accept the trial court’s findings of fact that are supported by substantial evidence, but we freely review the application of constitutional principles to the facts as found. State v. Atkinson, 128 Idaho 559, 561, 916 P.2d 1284, 1286 (Ct. App. 1996). At a suppression hearing, the power to assess the credibility of witnesses, resolve factual conflicts, weigh evidence, and draw factual inferences is vested in the trial court. State …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals