State v. Eagle

879 S.E.2d 377

STATE of North Carolina

v.Jessica EAGLE, Defendant.

No. COA21-701

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed October 18, 2022

Attorney General Joshua H. Stein, by Assistant Attorney General Liliana R. Lopez, for the State.

Coleman, Gledhill, Hargrave, Merritt, & Rainsford, P.C., Hillsborough, by James Rainsford, and Cyrus Griswold, for Defendant.

JACKSON, Judge.

¶ 1 The issue in this case is whether a driver is "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when a police officer in a marked police cruiser drives slowly past a parked vehicle at night, backs up, pulls in behind the vehicle while activating the patrol car's blue lights, blocks the driver's exit, and then remains in the police cruiser while checking Defendant's license plate. Because we conclude that no reasonable person would believe she was free to drive off under such circumstances, we hold that Defendant was seized for purposes of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as Article I, § 20 of the North Carolina Constitution at the point in time when Deputy Belk pulled in behind Defendant while activating the patrol car's blue lights and blocked her exit. The trial court accordingly erred in denying Defendant's motion to suppress.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

¶ 2 On 14 November 2019, Deputy R. Belk of the Orange County Sheriff's Department was performing nightly business checks along Dairyland Road while driving her marked police cruiser. At 3:19 A.M., after Deputy Belk finished her check of the Maple View Farm Store, she observed a white sedan pull into the driveway of the nearby Maple View Agriculture Center. The business was not open at the time, and the entrance into the Maple View Agriculture Center was blocked by a locked gate. Deputy Belk drove slowly past the Maple View Agriculture Center driveway. Deputy Belk testified that at that point she was waiting to see if the vehicle was just turning around. The first thirty seconds of her dashboard camera reflects that Deputy Belk never completely went past the entrance. Instead, she put her car in reverse, slowly backed down Dairyland Road, and then activated her blue lights as she pulled into the driveway, coming to a stop at an angle the trial court found to be approximately 10 feet behind the white sedan. Deputy Belk further testified that she had observed no criminal violations prior to turning her blue lights on and pulling in behind Defendant's vehicle, thereby conceding the absence of reasonable suspicion.

¶ 3 Deputy Belk testified that because the road was dark and a portion of her police cruiser jetted into Dairyland Road, she turned on her blue lights for safety reasons, warning any approaching vehicles of her presence. Deputy Belk did not immediately exit her vehicle to check on the occupants as one might in a welfare check.¹ Instead, she calmly sat in her car and ran the plate. Both the driver and the passenger of the white sedan remained in the vehicle. Deputy Belk relayed the license plate information to communications and after approximately one minute, she exited her police cruiser and, with her firearm on her side, approached the driver's side door of the white sedan.

¶ 4 Once Deputy Belk approached, she introduced herself to Defendant who was seated in the driver's seat. She asked Defendant what she was doing and while doing so, noticed a strong odor of alcohol coming from inside the vehicle. She also observed that Defendant had red, glassy eyes and slurred speech. Deputy Belk asked Defendant and her passenger for their identification cards, which they produced. After they handed her their identification cards, Deputy Belk returned to her patrol vehicle with their cards. At the later suppression hearing, the trial court concluded that Defendant was not seized at any point up until Deputy Belk took the identification cards to the patrol vehicle.

¶ 5 After a district court bench trial on 30 July 2020, Defendant was found guilty of impaired driving and sentenced as a level five offender to 18 months of unsupervised probation in addition to a two-day suspended sentence. Defendant appealed the district court's judgment to Orange County Superior Court on 30 July 2020. On 15 February 2021, Defendant filed a motion to suppress with the required supporting affidavit in the superior court, challenging the stop of her vehicle as an unlawful seizure and detention. The motion included the following:

4. Deputy Belk observed that Defendant had pulled into the driveway so she slowly drove a few feet past the driveway. She then stopped, slowly backed up on the highway, turned on her blue lights, and then pulled in behind Defendant's vehicle.

5. She parked a few feet from Defendant's rear bumper. (Deputy Belk Dashcam video 0:00-0:30).

6. Defendant's car was blocked in by Deputy Belk's patrol vehicle because there was also a locked gate directly in front of Defendant's car.

7. Deputy Belk remained in her vehicle with the blue lights on for approximately one minute before she got out of the car.

...

27. Because she stayed in the car, Defendant acquiesced to Deputy Belk's show of authority and therefore a seizure was effectuated, implicating Defendant's constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 20 of the North Carolina Constitution.

28. In this case, Deputy Belk took the actions necessary to convey to a reasonable person that they were not free to leave. She not only blocked Defendant's path out of the driveway; but also she activated her blue lights as she was pulling in to block Defendant's path and remained parked behind Defendant with the blue lights on for over one minute before Officer Belk exited her marked patrol vehicle.

29. No reasonable person would feel free to leave. Blocked in by a marked patrol cruiser with its blue lights flashing, late at night with no other cars around. This is certainly a show of authority that restrained Defendant's liberty. At this point Defendant was illegally seized because Deputy Belk had no reasonable suspicion for her conduct.

...

31. Deputy Belk had no reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot and thus her actions violated Defendant's rights under the United States Constitution and the North Carolina Constitution.

¶ 6 The superior court heard arguments on Defendant's motion to suppress on 15 February 2021. Deputy Belk was the only witness who testified at the hearing. Dashboard camera footage and the officer's body camera footage of the interaction were admitted as Exhibits 1 and 2.

¶ 7 At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court determined that the encounter between Defendant and Deputy Belk was not a traffic stop, but was a voluntary encounter up until the point where Deputy Belk took possession of Defendant's identification card. The trial court therefore denied Defendant's motion to suppress.

¶ 8 On 17 March 2021, the trial court entered a written order denying Defendant's motion to suppress that included the following pertinent Findings of Fact:

4. Deputy Belk observed a white sedan traveling on Dairyland Road and pull into the driveway of the Maple View Agriculture Center located at 3501 Dairyland Road at approximately 3:19am.

5. The Maple View Agriculture Center was not open at 3:19am and there was a closed gate locking all traffic from driving towards the building.

6. The white sedan stopped in the driveway at the closed gate.

7. Deputy Belk observed the vehicle pull into the driveway and waited to see if the white sedan would turn around.

8. The white sedan continued to sit parked in front of the closed gate.

9. Deputy Belk pulled behind the white sedan, stopping approximately ten feet behind the white sedan and activated the blue lights on her vehicle.

...

14. Deputy Belk briefly touched the back of the white sedan with her hand before making contact with the driver, Ms. Eagle.

Based on these findings, the trial court concluded as a matter of law:

2. The Court concludes that Ms. Eagle was seized under the Fourth Amendment at the point Deputy Belk took Ms. Eagle's identification and returned to her law enforcement vehicle. Until that point, Ms. Eagle was not seized under the Fourth Amendment and the encounter was a voluntary encounter.

...

4. Here, the circumstances surrounding the incident indicate that a reasonable person would have believed that she was not free to leave when Deputy Belk took possession of Ms. Eagle's identification cards and returned to the vehicle. At this point is when a seizure occurred under the Fourth Amendment. Until that point, the encounter was a voluntary encounter.

5. The Court finds that a seizure did not occur when Deputy Belk pulled behind Ms. Eagle's vehicle and initiated the blue lights. Using the Isenhour factors, the Court finds the following: Deputy Belk was the only law enforcement officer present at this time and did not conduct herself in a manner that is considered threatening. Deputy Belk did not display a weapon during the interaction and only used a hand-held flashlight for light, given that it was 3:19am. Deputy Belk did not physically touch Ms. Eagle and Deputy Belk's momentarily touching of the back of Ms. Eagle's vehicle did not rise to a seizure. Deputy Belk used a calm tone throughout the conversation with Ms. Eagle. Deputy Belk did not raise her voice, yell, or give any commands to Ms. Eagle. Ms. Eagle was cooperative with Deputy Belk and answered all questions posed regarding Ms. Eagle being lost voluntarily.

6. Pursuant to State v. Nunez , 274 N.C.App. 89, 849 S.E.2d 573 (2020), the Court finds that the mere activation of Deputy Belk's blue lights did not constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. For a defendant to be seized under the Fourth Amendment, he must submit, or yield, to an officer's activation of blue lights or siren[.]

¶ 9 Two months later, defense counsel filed a Notice of Intent to Plead Guilty and Reserve the Right to Appeal the Denial of the Motion to Suppress, which...