Is a Lane Change Sufficient to Support a Texas DWI Stop?

A police officer must have “reasonable suspicion” to pull a driver over. In most cases, this reasonable suspicion takes the form of the officer observing an apparent traffic violation. And while most such stops end up in nothing more than a traffic ticket, if the officer observes evidence of other potential offenses, such as drunk driving, that can lead to the driver’s arrest.

Crossing Fog Line Leads to DWI Conviction

Many Texas DWI cases turn on the legality of the original traffic stop. If the arresting officer lacked reasonable suspicion to initiate the stop, then anything that follows from is effectively inadmissible in court. So it is often necessary to determine whether there was, in fact, a traffic violation in the first place.

Take this recent decision from the Texas Ninth District Court of Appeals, Wells v. State. This case started when a state trooper patrolling I-10 saw the defendant fail to maintain his lane. The trooper later testified that the defendant “crossed over the outside fog line, began weaving within his lane, [and] crossed over the outside fog line again.” At that point, the trooper initiated a traffic stop. This stop led the trooper to suspect the defendant was intoxicated. Ultimately, the trooper arrested the defendant and, after the trial court denied a defense motion to suppress the evidence gathered during the stop, the defendant agreed to plead guilty but reserved his right to appeal.

On appeal, the defendant argued his case was similar to one described in a 2022 decision from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA), State v. Hardin. In that case, the CCA held that a driver does not commit a lane-change violation “if the car’s right-rear tire briefly, but safely, touches and drives over the dividing line between the center and right lane of traffic.” The CCA, agreeing with two lower courts, held that an officer could not form a reasonable suspicion to initiate a traffic stop based on such behavior.

The Ninth District, however, said the facts of this case differed from those in Hardin. Notably, the trooper in this case testified that the defendant’s lane change “was not safe due to the darkness, wet road conditions, and impaired visibility.” By contrast, in Hardin there were no other facts or circumstances that suggested the defendant’s actions were unsafe. Furthermore, even the CCA’s Hardin decision noted that “even under circumstances in which a motorist crosses from one lane to another without necessarily raising a safety concern, that behavior can still be considered along with other facts to provide reasonable suspicion to stop for suspicion of driving while intoxicated.”

Contact a San Marcos DWI Lawyer Today

The defendant in the Wells case received probation following his conviction. But drunk driving can lead to significant jail time, even for a first-time offender. So if you are facing such charges it is crucial to work with a skilled San Marcos DWI lawyer who can represent and defend your interests in court. Contact The Law Offices of David C. Hardaway today at 512-805-6613 to schedule a consultation.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13111645742409145263