Title: State v. Doyon

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

State v. Doyon (99-299); 171 Vt. 546; 758 A.2d 816 

[Filed 21-Aug-2000]

 
                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 99-299

                             JANUARY TERM, 2000

State of Vermont	               }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	District Court of Vermont,
                                       }	Unit No. 3, Caledonia Circuit
Paul L. Doyon	                       }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 29-6-99Cacs

                                                Trial Judge:  Alan W. Cook

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       The State appeals the district court's determination that there was no
  justifiable basis for the  stop that led to defendant's arrest for driving
  while intoxicated.  We reverse.

       At approximately two-thirty in the morning of May 22, 1999, a state
  trooper observed  defendant operating a vehicle close to or on the
  centerline of a paved highway.  The officer then  observed defendant's
  vehicle swerve to the right and then eventually turn into a driveway.  The 
  officer followed defendant after he pulled back onto the highway and drove
  first onto one dirt road,  and then another.  Defendant drove down the
  center of these dirt roads.  At some point, the officer  stopped defendant
  for the prior erratic operation and for failing to drive on the right. 
  Eventually,  defendant was processed and charged with driving while
  intoxicated, third offense.

       Following a hearing, the district court granted defendant's motion to
  suppress, ruling that the  officer had no reasonable and articulable basis
  for stopping defendant.  The court noted that it is the  custom of many
  Vermonters to drive in the center of dirt roads until and unless they see
  oncoming  traffic.  On appeal, the State argues that the officer's stop was
  justified based on his observation of  defendant violating state law
  requiring motorists to drive on the right side of roads.  See 23 V.S.A. § 
  1031 (driving to right).

       Except for circumstances that did not exist in this case, § 1031(a)
  requires persons to drive on  the right half of roadways of sufficient
  width.  The undisputed testimony of the officer was that  defendant was
  driving left of the center of the road, and that although the road was wide
  enough for  two cars to pass, it was questionable whether an oncoming car
  could have passed by defendant  because of his position in the center of
  the road.  Given defendant's failure to stay to the right, as  required by
  statute, the officer was justified in stopping him.  See State v. Welch,
  162 Vt. 635, 636,