Usually, when a person states, “I was not read my rights!” they are referring to their Miranda Warnings/Rights. Miranda Warnings protect people from being compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against themselves.[1] The Miranda Warnings/Rights are: (1) You have the right to remain silent; (2) Anything you say can and will be used against you in court; (3) You have the right to consult with an attorney and have an attorney present during questioning; and (4) If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to you before questioning at no cost to you.[2] Continue reading →

In Utah, an informant can provide the information that the peace officer relies on to establish the necessary reasonable suspicion to justify a stop of a vehicle.

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects citizens from unlawful investigatory stops of their vehicles by peace officers.[1] Investigatory stops of vehicles are only permissible if the peace officer has a reasonable suspicion that the driver has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity. Reasonable suspicion is dependent upon both the content of information possessed by the peace officer and its degree of reliability. Both of these factors are taken into account by Utah Courts when evaluating whether the peace officer had reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle. Continue reading →

In Utah, a peace officer, without a warrant[1], may acquire a blood sample[2] from a defendant, if the defendant consents[3] to the blood draw.  However, the State of Utah bears the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence[4], that defendant’s consent was freely and voluntarily given. … Continue reading →

In Utah, a peace officer may draw a person’s blood without a warrant if the state can show by a totality of the circumstances that both probable cause and exigent circumstances justified the warrantless blood draw. Continue reading →

A community caretaker vehicle stop allows a peace officer to stop a vehicle based upon his concern for the driver’s safety. Usually, a peace officer is only justified in stopping vehicles when: (1) The peace officer observes the driver of the vehicle commit a traffic violation; (2) the peace officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that the driver is committing a traffic offense, such as driving under the influence of alcohol or driving without a license; and (3) the peace officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that the driver is engaged in more serious criminal activity, such as transporting drugs. Continue reading →

Utah’s DUI statute states, “A person may not operate or be in actual physical control of a vehicle within the state if the person: (a) has sufficient alcohol in the person’s body that a subsequent chemical test shows that the person has a blood or breath alcohol concentration of .08 grams or greater at the time of the test; (b) is under the influence of alcohol, any drug, or the combined influence of alcohol and any drug to a degree that renders the person incapable of safely operating a vehicle; (c) has a blood or breath alcohol concentration of .08 grams or greater at the time of operation or actual physical control.[1] Continue reading →

The Utah and Federal Constitutions take the position that in the absence of reasonable suspicion, drivers have the right to be left alone. However, under both the Utah and Federal Constitutions administrative highway checkpoints are permitted as a narrow exception … Continue reading →

In State v. Morris, the Utah Supreme Court ruled that if a peace officer stops a vehicle on an objectively reasonable but ultimately mistaken suspicion of a traffic violation, the peace officer may approach the driver to explain his mistake … Continue reading →

The Utah Court of Appeals ruled that in order to ensure that breath test results are presumed valid, Utah Prosecutors must present evidence of the following: (1) the breath machine had been properly checked by a trained technician, and that … Continue reading →

An unreasonable traffic stop is an unconstitutional seizure.1 To determine whether a traffic stop was reasonable, Utah Courts consider two questions: Was the peace officer’s action justified at its inception; and Was the resulting detention reasonably related in scope to the … Continue reading →