North Carolina Criminal Appeal in US Supreme Court Poses Question of Whether Cops Can Make up the Law as They Go

The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on October 6, 2014, in the criminal appeal case of Heien v. North Carolina. On April 29, 2009, Heien was pulled over for a traffic stop where he was the passenger. Heien was with his friend Vasquez. They each gave inconsistent stories about where they were going. Heien is the owner of the vehicle and consented to the search of his vehicle. Sergeant Darisse found cocaine in the vehicle and charged them with drug trafficking. Heien argued that Darisse did not have reasonable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop. The car only had one working rear brake light and Heien argued that the statute only calls for one working light. The language of the North Carolina statute is vague and the State argued that even if there was a mistake of law, the traffic stop was still valid.

Heien appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals (COA) of North Carolina which interpreted the statute as requiring only one light. The COA stated that the stop then became invalid and illegal because of the police officer’s “mistake of law” about how many brake lights are required. The COA believed a mistake of law is automatically unreasonable and reversed the trial court’s decision. The Supreme Court of North Carolina decided those police officers should be able to make traffic stops on their reasonable interpretations of the law and reversed the COA’s decision. Heien then brought a criminal appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court will look to whether a mistake of law is enough to meet the reasonable suspicion standard required when initiating a traffic stop. Heien believes that police would take advantage of all ambiguities in the law and lack incentive to learn and act in accordance with the law if the stop of his vehicle is valid.

The decision in this criminal appeal case will be important in criminal law. The decision, in this case, will have an impact on criminal cases in Minnesota and how they are handled. Max Keller has handled many criminal appeal cases.  He has appealed many decisions to the Minnesota Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Minnesota. Keller Criminal Defense Attorneys has won appeals in both the Minnesota Court of Appeals and the Minnesota Supreme Court. If you are looking for an experienced criminal defense attorney to file a criminal appeal for you, contact Keller Criminal Defense Attorneys for a free consultation. There are many strict deadlines in the case of an appeal, so contact Max Keller as soon as possible.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

Getting falsely accused of domestic violence in Minnesota may put you at risk of losing your job, custody of your children, or even your home. You may face criminal charges and the accusation may damage your reputation in the community, as people will now view you as an abuser. False domestic violence accusations often happen when couples are in a contentious relationship with a risk of divorce.
The top reasons for license suspension in Minnesota include driving under the influence of alcohol, repeated traffic violations, and failure to appear in court or pay fines. Failure to pay child support, criminal convictions and felonies, medical conditions/disabilities, and drag racing can also lead to license suspension. The suspension takes away your driving privileges, preventing you from driving legally.
Motorists arrested for allegedly driving while impaired might wonder, “Can you refuse a breathalyzer?” In Minnesota, the implied consent law requires a person licensed to drive, control, or operate a vehicle to agree to a chemical test to check for alcohol or other intoxicants in that person’s body. Refusing to submit to a breathalyzer or another chemical test is a crime, often charged as a gross misdemeanor.