Massachusetts Operating Intoxicating Citizen Arrest Misdemeanor Lawyers Attorneys

Defendant was arrested in Massachusetts by a Vermont state trooper and later convicted of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor, in violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 90, § 24, after defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained by the Vermont state trooper was denied by the trial court.

COMMONWEALTH vs. JOANNE P. SAVAGE.
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
October 5, 1999, Argued
Defendant was arrested in Massachusetts by a Vermont state trooper and later convicted of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor, in violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 90, § 24, after defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained by the Vermont state trooper was denied by the trial court. Defendant appealed, claiming that the stop and her subsequent arrest were unlawful because the Vermont state trooper acted outside his jurisdiction and he had no authority for a citizen's arrest.

Issue:

Whether a trooper's stop of defendant for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor was lawful?

Discussion and Holding:

            The court observed that in general, we note that a police officer may lawfully act only within jurisdictional limitations except if specially authorized to act by statute or if the officer is performing a valid citizen's arrest under common law. This arrest falls outside the purview of G. L. c. 276, § 10A, because the statute applies only to felonies, and an initial offense of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor is a misdemeanor. See note 6, infra, and accompanying text. In any event, on these facts, the "fresh pursuit" requirement of G. L. c. 276, § 10A, was not met. While in Vermont, Trooper Gerard did not personally observe the brown vehicle being operated erratically. Nor did a fellow officer of the Vermont State police observe the brown vehicle while in Vermont.  These facts compel the conclusion that Trooper Gerard was not in "fresh pursuit" of the defendant's vehicle at the moment he crossed from Vermont into Massachusetts. Here, the Vermont State trooper acted without statutory or common-law authority when he stopped the defendant in Massachusetts. In this case the only evidence that the defendant was operating a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor would not have been obtained but for the unlawful stop and subsequent arrest.

Judgment reversed.

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group.  They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions.  The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content

Article Tags: Vehicle While Under, Vehicle While, While Under

Source: Free Articles from ArticlesFactory.com

ABOUT THE AUTHOR