i i i i i i



### OPIN ION No s. 04 -0 9- 00 20 4- CR & 04 -0 9- 00 20 5- CR J ohn David M AR TIN EZ , Ap pe lla nt
v . The STA TE of

Te xas, Appellee Fr om the County

Court at L aw of

Val Ve rde County , Texas Tr ia l Co ur

t N os . 0 7- 57 0- CR & 07 -5 71 -C R Honora ble Serg io J . Gonzalez, J udg e Presiding Opinion by : Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Sitt ing: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Phy lis J . Speedlin, J ustice Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Deliver ed and F iled: Dece mber 16, 2009 AFF I RMED J ohn David Mar

tinez wa s ch ar g ed with driving while intox icated a nd possession of
mari jua na . Mart ine z fi le d a mot ion to su pp re ss, a lle g ing the po lic e of fi c e r d id n ot h a ve re a so na ble
su sp ic ion fo r the in it ial st op of

his ve hic le . A ft e r a

he ari ng , th e tr ia l c ourt

de nie d th e mot ion

to suppress. Mar

tinez subsequently enter ed a plea of g uilty pursuant to a plea

barg ain, which the c ourt f o ll o w e d
. M arti n e z a

p p e a ls , c o mp la in in g th e tr ia l c o u rt e r r e d in d e n yin g h is mo ti o n to s u p p r e s s . We
a ff ir m.04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

1 ... T he rec o rd d o es no t i nd i ca t e if an y cha rge s we re e ve r f i l ed i n c o nn ec t i o n wit h t he t ak i ng o f t he b i cyc l es.

- 2- B ACKG ROUND Offic er Pa u l Hu rl ey o f t he De l Rio P olice De partment wa s on routine patrol on a Sunday night. At 10:55 p.m., Off icer Hurley hear d the police dispatc her r eport that a “passe rby ” had ca lled to s ta te that a

blu e F or d tr

uc k h a d s topp ed at 1 7th

and No rt h M a in S tr e e ts a

nd a ma le pu t so me bicy cles in the ba ck of the truck. The re port also indicated the truck lef t driving w estbound. Off

icer Hurley drove to the gene ral area mentioned i n the dispatch a nd observe d a man in a F ord F -250 truck that appea

red to be blue. The vehicle was coming from the g ener al ar ea r eporte d by the dispatche r. The off icer did not notice any

other ve hicle in the ar ea. O ffice r Hurle y followed the truc k for approximately

four blocks a

nd decide d to stop the vehicle. T he stop took place approximately seven min ute s a ft e r he fi rs t he ard the re po rt fr om the dis patc he r. Th e loc a tio n w a s a pp ro xima te ly

on e -h a lf to three- fourths of a

mile from wher e the bicycles we re r eporte dly taken. As he wa lked t o the driver’s s ide of the truck, O ffice r Hurle y noticed two bicycles in the open tr uc k bed
. He then

de te c te d a

str on g od or

of a lc oh ol a nd no tic e d M art ine z ha d b loo ds ho t, g la ssy ey es. Martinez g ot out of the truck and Offic er Hurley saw him holding on to the side of the truc k to s t ea d y h i s balanc e. Of fice r Hurle y

told Martinez that he had stopped him bec ause his truc k matched the descr iption of the vehicle involved in a possible theft. A fe w minutes afte r the stop, Offic er H urley

asked the dispatcher

if a victim had be en located. The of fice r there afte r re quested the dispatche r to send the c aller t o t h e s ce n e o f the stop. At some point, Offic er G ee, who was
or ig ina lly dis patc he d to inv e sti g a te the takin g of the bic y c le s, 1 also arr ived at the sc ene. T he informan t d

r o v e u p s o o nth e r e a f

te r an d c o n f ir me d th a t O f f ic e r H u r le y h a d s to p p e d th e c o r rec t04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

- 3- vehicle. T he re cord doe s n o t indicate the na me of the infor

mant, but Office r Hurle y

testified the
c iti zen did no t ha ve any re latio ns hip to t

he De l Rio Pol ic e de pa

rtme nt. B a se d o n h is o bs e rv a tio ns , O ff ic e r H ur le y

a sk e d Mar

tin e z to p e rf

or m se ve ra l f

ie ld s ob ri e ty tests, and he plac ed Mar

tinez under arr est for D WI
. As a result of t he arrest for DWI , Offic er H urley obtained evide nce to c harg e Mar tinez with pos session of under two ounces of

marihuana
. S TA N D A R D O F R EVIEW We reviewthe trial cour t’s ruling on a m o t i on to suppress under an abuse of discre tion standard. State v. Dixon , 206 S.W .3d 587, 590 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We view the re cord in the light most favor able to the tria l court’s rulingand will reve rse only if the ruli ng is outside the zone of re asonable disag ree ment. Id . We give almost tota l defe renc e to the trial c ourt’s dete rmination of hi s to r ic a l f

a c ts , e s p e c ia ll y

th o s e b a s e d

o nane v a lu a ti o no f

th e w it n e s s e s ’ c r e d ib il it

y and demea nor. Gu zm an v . S tate , 955 S.W .2d 85, 89 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We review de novo the trial court’s application of t he law of search and seizure t o the fa cts. W ie dev . S tate , 214 S.W .3d 17, 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). We will sust ain the trial c ourt’s ruling “if it is rea sonably supported by the re cord a

nd is corre ct on any

theory of law a pplicable to the c ase.” Dixon , 206 S.W .3d at 590. A PP LI C A BLE L AW An offic er must possess re asonable suspicion to initiate an investig ative stop. Da v is v . S tate , 947 S. W. 2 d 2 4 0 , 2 4 4
- 4 5 ( T e x. Cr im
. A p p . 1 9 9 7 )
. “ Re a s o n a b le s u s p ic io n e xis ts if th e o f f ic er ha s specific , articula

ble fa cts that, when c ombined with rational infere nces from those fa cts, would lead him to r e a so na

bly c on c lud e that a

pa rt ic ula r p e rs on a c tua lly is, ha s be e n, or

so on wi ll b e e ng a g e d in criminal ac tivity .” Fo rd v . S tate , 1 58 S.W. 3d

488, 49 2 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 20 05 ). “ Un de r t his04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

- 4- standard, the articula

ble fa cts on which the of

fice r relied need only support a rea sonable belief that activity out of the ordinar

y is occur ring or has occur

red, that the detaine e is conne cted to the unusua l activity , and that the unusual activity is related to c rime.” Sta te v . G ar c ia , 2 5 S. W. 3 d 9 0 8 , 9 1 2 ( T e x. App.—Houston [14th Dis t.] 2000, no pet.). Rea sonable suspicion is depende nt upon both the content of the information possessed by police and its de g ree of reliability
. Alab am a v . W hite , 496 U.S. 325, 329- 31 (1990) ; G an sk yv . S tate , 180 S.W .3d 240, 244-45 (Tex
. App.—For t Worth 2005, pet. re f’d)
. An anony mous tip standing alone will rar ely supply police with rea sonable suspi cion. See Fl or ida v . J

.L. , 529 U.S. 266, 270 (2000). Howe ver, suc h a ti p coupled with observations by police may ultimately

prese nt rea sonable suspicion. See, e .g., Alabama , 49 6 U. S. at 33 1; Bi ly e u v . S tate , 13 6 S. W.3 d 6 91 , 69 5- 96 (T e x. Ap p. –T e xar ka na 20 04 , no pe t.) . “ An

of fi c e r’ s p ri or

kn ow le dg e , h is experience , and his corr oboration of the de tails of a tip may be conside red in g iving the a nony mous tip the weig ht it deserves.” Da v is v . S tate , 9 89 S.W. 2d

85 9, 86 4 ( Te x. Ap p. —Aus tin 19 99 , p e t.
re f’ d) . Co rr ob or a tio n me ans , in lig ht o f t he c ir c ums tanc e s, the po lic e of fi c e r c on fi rm s e no ug h f

a c ts
so that he may

re a so na bly c on c lud e that th e informa ti on pr ov ide d is re lia

ble and a de te nti on

is justified. Alabama , 49 6 U. S. at 32 9- 31 ; Br oth e r v . S tate , 166 S.W .3d 255, 259 n.5 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005), cert. de nied , 546 U.S. 11 50 (2006); State v. Nelson , 22 8 S. W.3 d 8 99 , 9 03 (T e x. Ap p. —Aus tin 2007, no pet.). A tipster is no longe r consider ed anony mous when he presents him self to police a nd can be held ac countable f

or the infor

mation he provided. Se e, e. g. Ga rc ia , 25 S.W. 3d a t 91 3; Sta te v . S ailo , 910 S. W. 2 d

1 8 4 , 188 (Tex. App.—For t Worth 1995, pet. ref’d.) . “Unsolicited infor mation reg arding04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

- 5- a cr ime in prog ress provide d by a citizen who has no re lationship with t he police a nd who makes herse lf ac countable by

providing contac t information is inherently reliable .” Nelson , 228 S.W .3d at 903. D I S CUS S I ON Martinez argues the stop was not supporte d by rea sonable suspicion bec ause the information
was re ported by

an anony mous tipst er, the bicy cles in question wer e neve r re ported stolen and the stop was base d solely

on the color of

the vehicle . First, Mar

tinez m i s co n s t rues the na ture of the informant. Al t h o ug h the name of the citizen tipst er doe s not appea r in the re cord, the dispatcher appar ently

maintained conta ct with the ca ller throug hout the stop a s the dispatcher was able to direct the ca ller to the sce ne to identify the truck. Un d er s i m i lar c ircumstance s, other cour ts have conclude d the tipster is entitled to more re liability than that of a

true a nony mous caller. See, e .g., Re esin g v . S

tate , 140 S.W .3d 732, 737 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004, pet. ref ’d) ( holding 911 c aller’ s reliability demonstrated by

identifying himself, rem ai n i n g on phone while police eff ecte d stop, fo llo we d the su sp e c t’ s ve hic le , and wa ite d a t sc e ne to g ive state me nt t o p oli c e ); Ha wes v . S tate , 125 S.W .3d 535, 5 4 0 (T ex . Ap p .—Houston [1s t Dist.] 2002, no pet.) (holdingtow truck drive r that
re lay e d in fo rm a tio n to po lic e a bo ut de fe nd ant’ s er

ratic dr ivi nga s h e fo llo we d d e fe nd ant’ s v e hic le entitled to gr eate r re liability than anony

mo u s t i p s t er beca

use informa

nt “plac[ed] himself in a po sit ion wh e re he c ou ld b e he ld a c c ounta ble fo r h is i nte rv e nti on ” ); Sa ilo , 91 0 S
. W.2d at 188 (holding an o n y

m ous citiz en who stopped to tell police de fenda nt was driving err atically was
c on sid e re d mor e re lia

ble tha n a no ny mou s ti ps te r whe re c iti zen fo llo we d p oli c e ins tr

uc tio ns to p ull to t h e s i d e of the road e ven thoug h he drove awa y befor e off

icer s could obtain identifying04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

- 6- inf or ma tio n)
. Ac c or din g ly , we vie w the inf or matio n pro vid e d b y

the c a lle r a s c omi ngfr om a re lia ble person r ather

than a mer e anony

mous tipst er. Mart ine z al so argue s th e inf or matio n p ro vid e d b y

the tip ste r d oe s n ot a

mou nt t o r e a so na

ble suspicion beca

use the State fa iled to show that a crime had occur red. Reasonable suspicion does not turn on the occurre nce of an actual cr ime, only that the re ported a ctivity

is “out of the ordina

ry ,” and is related to c rime. Ga rc ia , 25 S.W .3d at 912. Off icer Hurley , an of

fi ce r with eleve n y ear s experience , testified it was “suspicious” f or someone to stop his truck at 11:00 p.m. and place two bicy cles in the be d of the truc k. Although no c omplainant had bee n identified at the time of the stop, Of fi c e r H ur le y

c on sid e re d th e c a ll to be re po rt ing a the ft . U nd e r t he tot a lity of the c ir c ums tanc e s, t h e r e p o rt e d

a c t i v i t y w a s s u f

f i c i e n t l y r e l a t e d

t o c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y. Finally , Martinez argues the stop w as unrea sonable beca use it was base d solely

on the color of his ve hic le and

the of fi c e r fai led to cor

ro bo rate any

inf or matio n p ro vid e d b y

the tip ste r. Th is
argume nt i g no re s mu c h o f t he e vid e nc e . Of

fi c e r Hurl e y

te sti fi e d h e sto pp e d th e ve hic le be c a us e it
wa s co m i ng from the a

rea wher e the a ctivity

had bee n repor

ted; the vehicle was the same ty pe of tr uc k a s th a t r e po rt e d a

nd wa s an “ a

pp ro ximate” c olo r m a tc h; h e did no t se e any

oth e r v e hic le s in the ar ea; a nd he stopped the truc k in less than seven minutes fr om when he hear d the re port from the dispatcher
. The totality

of the c ircumstance s, including the reliability of the c aller, Off

i cer Hurley ’s eleve n y ear s of experience , and the corr oboration of the inf ormation provided by

the ca ller, provided
rea sonable suspicion for

the investig ative stop. The tria l c ourt did not abuse its discretion in denying the mot ion

to s up pr e ss.04
- 09
- 00 20 4- CR & 04
- 09
- 00 20 5- CR

- 7- C ONCL US I ON The trial c ourt’s judg ments are aff irmed. Steven C. Hilbig , J ustice

Pub lis h