About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

60 S.D. L. Rev. 327 (2015)
Presumed Drunk until Proven Sober: The Dangers and Implications of Anonymous Tips Following Navarette v. California

handle is hein.journals/sdlr60 and id is 353 raw text is: PRESUMED DRUNK UNTIL PROVEN SOBER: THE DANGERS AND IMPLICATIONS OF ANONYMOUS TIPS FOLLOWING NA VARETTE V. CALIFORNIA CHRISTOPHER D. SOMMERSt In Navarette v. California, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an officer who receives an anonymous tip of reckless driving does not have to corroborate erratic or suspicious driving to initiate a traffic stop. The majority reasoned that the contemporaneity of the report and the event, as well as the caller's use of the 911 emergency system, supported the anonymous tip 's reliability. The Court also held that an allegation of a single instance of reckless driving from an unknown, unaccountable informant supported reasonable suspicion of drunk driving. In so ruling, the majority disregarded the inherent Fourth Amendment problems associated with anonymous informants, the factors that determine an informant's credibility, and the implications the decision will have on the individual's privacy interests. The dissenting opinion correctly pointed out that there was no reason to believe the anonymous informant 's allegation and that nothing in the tip could have supported reasonable suspicion of drunk driving. The Court's holding has made it much easier for anyone who wants a vehicle pulled over to succeed in doing so. I. INTRODUCTION It is a Friday night, you are at a bar with your friends, and you have decided to be the designated driver.1 As your group leaves, another patron of the bar writes down your vehicle's model, license plate number, and the direction you are headed.2 What if this patron calls 911 and, without revealing his identity, falsely reports that your vehicle has just run him off the road?3 Imagine then, that a law enforcement officer responds to the false report, locates your vehicle, and pulls you over without observing any traffic violations.4 What if, rather than another bar patron, it is an off-duty law enforcement officer that anonymously reports reckless driving?5 Perhaps he sees you and Copyright © 2015. All Rights Reserved by Christopher D. Sommers and the South Dakota Law Review. f J.D. Candidate, 2016, University of South Dakota School of Law; B.S. in Economics, 2013, North Dakota State University. I would like to thank the South Dakota Law Review, and a special thanks to my devoted editorial team: Melissa Knight, Elizabeth Chrisp, and Aron Hogden. I would also like to thank my mother, Myra Sommers, for all her support, and my father, Judge Richard Sommers, for everything he has taught me. I. See State v. Kooima, 833 N.W.2d 202, 203-04 (Iowa 2013). 2. See id. at 204. 3. See id.; Navarette v. California (Navarette 11), 134 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (2014). 4. See Kooima, 833 N.W.2d at 205. 5. See State v. Watkins, 463 S.E.2d 802, 803-04 (N.C. Ct. App. 1995) (suppressing evidence obtained from traffic stop after police officer orchestrated false tip).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most