Skip to main content

STATE v. PIEPER (2022)

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Emma Charlotte PIEPER, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20220084

Decided: September 29, 2022

Andrew C. Eyre, Assistant State's Attorney, and Vanessa Sigette, under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, North Dakota, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Challis D. Williams, Grand Forks, North Dakota, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

[¶1] Emma Pieper appeals from an amended criminal judgment after entering a conditional plea of guilty to driving under the influence and driving under suspension. On appeal, she argues that the law enforcement officer lacked a reasonable and articulable suspicion to justify the stop of her vehicle, thus violating the Fourth Amendment and the North Dakota Constitution. We conclude the officer's observations were sufficient to raise a reasonable and articulable suspicion justifying the traffic stop. Kappel v. Dir., N.D. Dep't of Transp., 1999 ND 213, ¶¶ 9-12, 602 N.W.2d 718 (An officer may have reasonable and articulable suspicion after observing “ ‘a series of acts, each of them perhaps innocent in itself, but which taken together warranted further investigation.’ ”). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

Per Curiam.

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte

Was this helpful?

Thank you. Your response has been sent.

Copied to clipboard