IN THE SUPREME COURT OF IOWA No. 17–0367 Filed June 28, 2019 STATE OF IOWA, Appellee, vs. SCOTTIZE DANYELLE BROWN, Appellant. Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Nathan A. Callahan, District Associate Judge. The defendant challenges her conviction for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated under Iowa Code section 321J.2 (2017), arguing she was subjected to an impermissible pretextual stop. AFFIRMED. Mark C. Smith (until withdrawal), State Appellate Defender, and Theresa R. Wilson, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kelli Huser (until withdrawal), Kevin Cmelik, and Israel Kodiaga Assistant Attorneys General, Brian Williams, County Attorney, and Charity Sullivan, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee. Rita Bettis of ACLU of Iowa Foundation, Des Moines; Russell E. Lovell II, Des Moines; David S. Walker, Windsor Heights; and Andrew B. Duffelmeyer (until withdrawal) of Glazebrook & Hurd, LLP, Des Moines, for 2 Amici Curiae American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, the NAACP, League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa, and 1000 Kids for Iowa. Alan R. Ostergren, Muscatine, for amicus curiae Iowa County Attorneys Association. 3 CHRISTENSEN, Justice. This case requires us to decide whether a motorist who breaks a traffic law may lawfully be stopped if the officer was motivated by investigative reasons for the stop. Around 12:25 a.m., a police officer observed the defendant making an improper turn and decided to follow the defendant. At a stoplight, the officer noticed the defendant’s vehicle had an improperly functioning license plate light and ran the vehicle information for the vehicle’s registered owner—who was not the defendant. The vehicle information revealed the registered owner’s affiliation to gang activity. Subsequently, the officer pulled the defendant over, which led to his discovery of the defendant’s open beer container in the center cupholder. The State charged the defendant with operating while intoxicated in violation of Iowa Code section 321J.2 (2016). The defendant moved to suppress all evidence obtained after the stop, arguing the officer conducted it in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution because the officer’s reasons for the stop were not the traffic violations themselves. The district court denied the motion to suppress and later convicted the defendant following a bench trial on the minutes. Consistent with precedent in Iowa and the vast bulk of authority elsewhere, we affirm the district court judgment because the subjective motivations of an individual officer for making a traffic stop are irrelevant as long as the officer has objectively reasonable cause to believe the motorist violated a traffic law. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. On October 17, 2015, Officer Justin Brandt of the Waterloo Police Department observed a black Lincoln Navigator at around 12:25 a.m. in the City of Waterloo. Officer Brandt observed the driver accelerating at a 4 yellow light and passing to the left of a moving vehicle before veering across the centerline. The traffic light changed from yellow to red as the Lincoln Navigator passed through ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals