T hi s or derand j udgm enti s notbi ndi ng pr ece dent , exce ptundert he doctr i nes of * l aw of the ca s e, r es j udi cat a, and col l at er al es t oppel
. T hi s cour tgener al l ydi s favor s t he ci t at i on of or der s and j udgm ent s ; nevert hel es s , an or derand j udgm entm aybe ci t ed under t he t er m s and condi t i ons of 10th C i r . R
. 36. 3. A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and the appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s t hr ee- j udge pane l has ** det er m i ned unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notbe of mat er i al as s i s t ance i n t he d e ter m in a tio n o f

th is a p p e a l. S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 .9 . T h e c a u se is th e re f o re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED Unite d St at e s C ourt o f Appe als Te nt h Ci r c uit 

### Jan u ar y 24, 2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT

UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA , Pl ai nt i ff - A ppel l ee, v. DE RR I CK RI CH AR DS ON, D e f e n d a n t - A p p e llan t. N o. 05- 5164 ( D. C. No
. 0 4
- CR
- 1 8 7
- 0 0 2
- T CK )

( N. D. OK)

ORDE R AND J UDGM EN T *
B efor e HENR Y, HOLL OW AY and LU CE RO , C i rcui tJudg es. **
D efe ndant
- appel l ant D err i ck R i char ds on br i ngs t hi s di r ectappea l fr om hi s convi ct i on
o n a sin g le c o u n t o f

p o ss e ss io n o f

f iv e k ilo g ra m s o r m o re o f c o c a in e w ith in ten t to d istrib u te and ai di ng and abe t t i ng co- defe ndant s J es s i e R i s er and T oy a B err yi n t he off ens e. Fol l ow i ng t he deni al of a mot i on t o s uppr es s t h e ev idence , w hi ch had be en j oi ned byco- defe ndant R i s er , R i char ds on ent er ed a c ondi t i onal pl ea of gui l t yt o t he cha r ge. H e w as s ent ence d t o 90
m ont hs ’ i m pr i s onm ent , a fi ve y eart erm of supervi s ed re l eas e, a fi ne of $5, 000, and a spe ci al-2-

as s es s m entof $100. I D efe ndantw as i n t he fr ontpas s engers eatof a r ent ed car bei ng dr i ven byco- defe ndant R i s erw hen the ca rw as pul l ed overby a s t at e tr oopernearV i ni t a, O kl ahoma. B err yand a chi l d w er e i n t he back of t he car , w hi ch B err y had re nt ed. T he ca rhad j us tpas s ed thr ough t he mai n t ol l gat e on the W i l l R oger s T ur npi ke w hen i tw as pul l ed over
. T he i ni t i al s t op w as bas ed on the dr i verfai l i ng t o s i gnal w hen br anchi ng off f r om t he tur npi ke i nt o t he t ol l pl aza . I I I R
. at 65- 66. W hether t hi s m aneuve rr equi r ed a s i gnal beca us e i tw as ei t hera l ane c hange
o r a n e x it fro m th e c o n tro lled a c c e ss tu rn p ik e is th e so le is su e o n a p p e a l. O n this turnpike, t he m ai n tol l plaza i s near the m i d-point , abo ut fi ve m i l es sout hw est of V i ni t a. D r i ver s w i t h el ectr oni c s i gnal i ng devi ces know n as pi k e p asse s ( w hi ch demonst r at e pr e- paym entof t ol l s ) con ti n u e s t r ai ghtahea d pas tt he t ol l ar ea, and ar e not
r equi r ed t o s l ow dow n. T he s peed l i m i t on t he tur npi ke i s 75 m i l es perhour
. D r i ver s w ho
a r e p a yi n g t h e t o l l i n c a s h e n t e r t h e t o l l p l a z a , w h i c h i s t o t h e r i g h to f t h e m a i n r o a d w a y. R i s er , dr i vi ng t he ca ri n w hi ch R i char ds on w as a pas s enger , di d nots i gnal w hen he w ent ri g h t in to th e to ll b o o th a re a . A l t hough t he r ecor d i s s l i ght l yuncl ear on t he poi nt , i tappea r s t hatdr i ver s ent er i ng t he t oll bo oth area, w hich c an properl y be enter ed on l y from t he ri gh t -hand l ane, do no tcross a l a n e ma r k e r . I I I R. a t 7 0
. Th i s f a c t p r o v i d e s t h e b a s i s f

o r d e f e n d a n t ’ s a r g um ent t hat no
s i gnal i s r equi r ed; he s ay s t hata s i gnal i s r equi r ed onl yforchangi ng l anes , and thatt hi s w as
no ta chan ge o f l anes.-3-

B e c a u se o n lyth e in iti a l sto p is c h a llen g e d o n a p p e a l, w e n e e d n o t d e tail th e f a c ts
r el at i ng t o t he conve r s at i ons betw een offi cer s and t he car ’ s occupa nt s and ot herfac t s w hi ch
a ro u se d th e o f

f ice rs’ su sp icio n s, n o r th e o th e r e v e n ts in th e se q u e n c e . It i s s u f f icie n t to n o te t hat eventual l y a t r ai ned dog al er t ed t o t he under carr i age of the ca r , w her e the s par e t i r e w as stow ed , an d that fiv e p ac k ag es ea ch co n tai n ing ab o u t on e k il o g ram o f c o ca ine w ere
s ubs equent l yr ecove r ed fr om t he under carr i age. II T he tr i al cour thel d an evi dent i aryhear i ng on t he mot i on to s uppr es s , atw hi ch the
o n l y t w o w i t n e s s e s w e r e S t a t e T r o o p e rH i s e , w h o m a d e t h e i n i t i a l s t o p , a n d T r o o p e rP e r r y,
w h o su b se q u e n tly a rriv e d to a ss ist T ro o p e r H ise . In a w ritten o rd e r d e n y in g th e m o tio n to
s uppr es s , t h e d ist ri ctj udge s ai d t hatt he evi dence s uppor t ed def endant ’ s ar gum entt hatno
c h a n g e o f

lan e w a s in v o lv e d in e n ter in g th e to ll are a . A tu rn sig n a l is re q u ire d b ysta tu te
w h e n c h a n g in g f

ro m a m a rk e d lan e . T h e sta tu te p ro v id e s: W heneve ranyr oadw ayhas been di vi ded i nt o t w o orm or e cl ear l ym arked l anes for t r aff

i c, t he fol l ow i ng r equi r ement s i n addi t i on t o al l ot her s cons i s t ent h e r e w i t h s h a l l a p p l y. 1 . A v e h icle sh a ll b e d riv e n a s n e a rlya s p ra c tica b le e n tirelyw ith in a sin g le l ane. 2. A veh i c le sh al l no tbe m ov ed from t he lane un t i l t he d ri ver has fi rs t as cert ai ned thatt he move m en t ca n b e made w i t h s afe t yand then gi ven a s i gnal , notl es s t han the l as t one hundre d ( 100) fee tt r avel ed byt he vehi cl e, of his i ntent i on t o ch ang e l anes.W e quot e the curr entver s i on of the s t atut e, w hi ch i s s ubs t ant i vel yt he s ame as an 1 ear l i erver s i on quot ed byt he di s t r i ctcour t . T he pr i m arydi ffe r ence i s t hatcurr ent s ubpar agr aphs one and tw o w er e i n a s i ngl e s ubpar agr aph pr i ort o amendm entof the s t atut e i n 2005. -4- 47 O kl a. St at . § 11- 309. T he di s t r i ctj udge s ai d t hatt he “e vi dence d o es n o ts how [the 1 dr i ver ] vi ol at ed thi s s t atut e; he neve rchange d l anes . ” The j udge conc l uded, how ever , t hat p re c e d e n t r e q u ir e d h im to h o ld th a t th e s to p w a s la w f u l. I n U ni t ed Stat es v. Manj ar r ez , 348 F. 3d 881 ( 10t h C i r . 2003) , t hi s cour tcons i der ed
a c a se w ith v e rysim ilar f a c ts e x c e p t th a t th e tra f

f ic s to p th e re w a s m a d e a t th e m id w a yto ll
ar ea of t he Turne rT ur npi ke i n O kl ahoma ( r oughl yfr om O kl ahoma C i t yt o T ul s a) , r athert han t he W i l l R og ers T u rnp i ke ( r oughl yfr om T ul s a t o J opl i n, M i s s our i )
. I n t hatcas e, aft er vi ew i ng a vi deo t ape of t he i nci dent , a di ffe r entdi s t r i ctj udge had found t hat t he def endant had “vi ol at ed O kl ahoma l aw w hen he f ai l ed t o s i gnal hi s exi tfr om t he tur npi ke .
. . . ” 348 F .3 d a t 8 8 5 . T h e d istric t ju d g e in th a t c a se h a d a lso c o n c lu d e d th a t “le a v in g th e tu rn p ik e to go on t o t he t ol l pl aza i s l eavi ng a l ane a s cont empl at ed by O kl ahoma s t atut es and ther efor e, pr eci pi t at es an obl i gat i on t o s i gnal
. ” Id . T h is c o u rt a f f irm e d , ex p re ss in g its a g re e m e n t w ith t he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s fi ndi ng t hatt he def endanthad changed l anes and t hat “a si gnal i s r equi r ed
w hen exi t i ng t he i nt er s t at e. ” Id
. C on cl ud i n g th a t Manj ar r ezw as contr oll i ng , t he d i stri ctj ud ge in the inst ant cas e deni ed the m ot i on t o s uppr es s and found t he i ni t i al s t op val i d, al t hough m aki ng i tcl eart hat he w oul d have f

ound ot herw i s e i f the ca s e had be en one of fi r s ti m pr es s i on. T he j udge r ead Manj ar r ezas hol di ng t hat“ent er i ng i nt o t he t ol l gat e ar ea i s ‘ exi t i ng’ t he toll road, even-5-

t hough a dr i ver r emai ns i n t he ver y s ame l ane fr om t he t i m e pr i ort o appr oachi ng t he t ol l ar ea
r i ghtup t o t he t i m e he i s att he ac tual t ol l boot h. ” O r derat5. III T he onl yi s s ue M r . R ichar ds on r ai s es on appea l i s w hethert he i ni t i al s t op w as ju stif ied . It i s w e ll se ttl e d th a t a tra f f ic s to p is a se izu re w ith in th e m e a n in g o f th e F o u rth A m endment and thata s t op i s val i d i f bas ed on an obs erved tr aff i c vi ol at i on orr eas onabl e,
a rt ic u la b le s u s p ic io n th a t a v io la tio n h a s o c c u rr e d
. See, e. g. , U ni t ed St at es v. C al l ar m an , 273 F. 3d 1284, 1286 ( 10t h C i r . 2001)
. I n t he pr es entcase the val i di t yof the s t op tur ns on
w h e th e r a d riv e r a p p ro a c h in g th e m a in to ll p laz a o n th e W ill R o g e rs T u rn p ik e is re q u ire d to
s i gnal hi s i nt ent t o go r i ght t o t he t ol l pl aza w hen doi ng s o does noti nvol ve cr os s i ng a l ane
m a rk e r. A l t ho ug h thi s seem s a verysi m ple quest i o n , th atapp earance i s decep t i ve b ecause fur t herexami nat i on r evea l s compl i cat i ons . T he maneuverati s s ue i s noteas i l ydet erm i ned to b e e ith e r a lan e c h a n g e o r a n e x it f r o m th e tu rn p ik e ; p a ra d o x ica lly , tho u g h , itis problem at i c t o v i ew i tas notei t her of those op t i on s. On o n e h a n d , t o s a yt h a te n t e r i n g t h e t o l l b o o t h a r e a i s “ e x i t i n g ” t h e t o l l r o a d s e e ms contr aryt o t he comm on under s t andi ng of the t erm , beca us e the t ol l p laza is p artof the tur npi ke. A dr i verhas one opt i on onl yaft er pas s i ng t hr ough t he t ol l pl aza , and thati s t o r eent ert he mai n fl o w o f t r aff i c on the t ol l r oad. B ycontr as t , or di nar i l yan “e xi t ” l eads t he d riv e r o f f o f th e to ll ro a d a lto g e th e r a n d o n to so m e o th e r h ig h w a yo r stre e t. O n t he otherhand, ourhol di ng i n M anj ar r ezsee m s to bi nd us t o t he pos i t i on t hat-6-

ent er i ng t he t ol l boot h ar ea i s an “exi t ” fr om t he t ol l r oad. A nd i tdoes i nvol ve l eavi ng t he fl ow of tr aff

i c, s o cal l i ng i tan “e xi t ” i s notunr eas onabl e, even though ent er i ng t he t ol l pl aza i s di fferentfrom t he m ostcom m on un derst and i ng of an exit from a con t rol l ed acc ess h i g h w a y. W hen the foc us i s i ns t ead on w hethert her e i s a l ane c hange i nvol ved i n ent er i ng t he t ol l ar ea, agai n w e confr ont s om ethi ng of a di l emm a. T he di s t r i ct j udge found t hatt her e w as no l ane c hange be caus e, as w e under s t and hi s or der , no l ane mar keri s cr os s ed. T hi s vi ew i s e a s y t o u n d e r s t a n d a n d h a s s u p e r f i c i a l v a l i d i t y , a tl e a s t , b u tf o ro n e f a c t : T h e r e c o r d s h o ws t hatt he r i ghtl ane di vi des att he entr yt o t he t ol l pl aza . A dr i ver w i t h a pi ke pas s can c ont i nue on t he s ame pat h att he s ame spe ed, bypas s i ng t he t ol l boot h ar ea. A dr i ver not havi ng a pi ke pas s m us tent ert he t ol l boot h ar ea a nd s t op atone of t he boot hs t o pay t he t ol l
. T he comm on,
e v e r y d a yu n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a “ l a n e ” d o e s n o ti n c l u d e a b r a n c h i n g p o i n to f f e r i n g t wo al t ernat i ve paths l i ke thi s . A nd t he evi dence s how ed thatthe s peed l i m i ton t he tur npi ke p ro p e r is 7 5 m iles p e r h o u r, w h e re a s u p o n e n ter in g th e a c c e ss lan e s to th e to ll p laz a th e lim it im m e d ia te ly d ro p s to 4 5 m ile s p e r h o u r. I II R . a t 7 3
. W e c o n clud e, ho w ev er, th at t h ese co m p li ca ti o n s are im m aterial in the en d b ec au se our di s pos i t i on i s contr ol l ed byourpr i oropi ni on i n M an j arrez. O urr eadi ng of M anj ar r ezd iffe rs f ro m th a t o f

th e d istric t ju d g e , at le a st a s w e u n d e r s ta n d h is re a d in g f ro m h is o rd e r in th is
cas e. T he di s t r i ct j udge s eems t o have vi ew ed M anj ar r ezas hol di ng t hatt he dr i veri n t hat
cas e had exi t ed t he tur npi ke even t hough t he dr i ver had not change d l an es. B u t t h e t r i al j udge i n Manj ar r ezhad hel d t haten t er i ng t he t ol l pl aza w as a l ane c hange, and w e s ai d,-7-

“[w ] e agr ee, ” bef

or e addi ng t hat“a s i gnal i s r equi r ed w hen exi t i ng t he i nt er s t at e. ” 348 F. 3d 885. T hus , w e r ead the ca s e as hol di ng t hata s i gnal w as r equi r ed both beca us e the dr i verhad
c h a n g e d l a n e s a n d b e c a u s e t h e d r i v e rh a d e x i t e d t h e r o a d w a y. W e have cons i der ed def endant ’ s ar gum entt hatt h ere is a n i nadequa t e bas i s for concl udi ng t hatt he tw o turn p ikes s houl d be governed byt he s ame r ul e. I ti s t rue thatour opi ni on i n Manj ar r ezd o e s n o t re v e a l w h e th e r a lan e m a rk e r w a s c ro ss e d in e n ter in g th e to ll b o o th a r e a o f

th e T u rn e r T u rn p ik e . B u t ev e n if th e re w e re a lan e m a rk e r c ro ss e d th e re , in
c o n tra st to th is ca se , th a t c a se h e ld th a t th e re w a s b o th a lan e c h a n g e a n d a n e x it in v o lv e d in
en teri n g the to ll p laza
. S o , ev en ac ce p ti n g as n o t clea rl yerro n eo u s the d istri ct j u d g e’s fi ndi ng t hatt her e w as no l ane c hange her e, w e ar e s t i l l be bound byt he hol di ng i n M anj ar r ez th a t th e re w a s a n e x it req u irin g a sig n a l. T he j udgm entof the di s t r i ctcour ti s t her efor e af fi r m ed. E n tered fo r th e C o u rt W il li am J. H o ll o w ay , Jr. C i r cui tJ udge05- 5164 - U ni t ed St at es v. R i char ds on

LU CE RO , j o i n e d b y HENR Y , C i r cui tJ udges , concurr i ng: I agr ee w i t h m yr es pect ed col l eague s t hatt he l anguage of U ni t ed St at es v. M anj arr ez, 3 4 8 F .3 d 8 8 1 (1 0 th C ir. 2 0 0 3 ), co n tro ls th is c a se , an d I a m c o m p e lled to jo in th e m a jo rity
o p in io n . I w ri te s e p a ra te ly to m a k e a n o b s e rv a tio n a b o u t o u r d e c is io n in M a n ja rr e z . A l t hough M anj arr ez vi ol at ed 47 O kl a. St at . t i t . 11, § 309( 1) w hen he fai l ed t o s i gnal befor e cha ngi ng l anes as he appr oache d a t ol l pl aza , our opi ni on i n t hatcas e appe ar s t o have
us ed br oaderl anguage t han the fa ct s nece s s i t at ed. I n M anj arr ez w e s tat ed t hatunder O kl ahoma l aw , “a s i gnal i s r equi r ed w hen exi t i ng t he i nt er s t at e” a nd appr oachi ng a t ol l pl aza . Id . a t 8 8 5
. I n t hi s cas e the di s t r i ct cour t found t hat R i char ds on r emai ned i n t he s ame l ane a s he appr oache d t he t ol l pl aza on t he W i ll R o g ers T ur npi ke. A s t he r i ghtl ane of t he tur npi ke
s pl i t s off t o t he r i ght , t hus “exi t i ng” t o for m fi ve t ol l l anes , t he r ecor d s ugges t s t hata dr i ver p ro c e e d in g in th e rig h t lan e o f tra v e l m a yp a ss th ro u g h th e to ll b o o th s w ith o u t th e n e c e ss ity of cha ngi ng l anes . U ndert h ese circum s t ance s , ourhol di ng i n M anj arr ez l eads t o w hat ap p ea rs t o b e a b izarre resu lt– tech n icall y , R icha rdso n m ayh av e “ex it ed ” the W il l R o g ers T ur npi ke t o payt he r equi r ed t ol l , butatno poi nt di d he cha nge l anes i n t he pr oces s . U nder thes e c ir cu m stan ce s, a sig n al on h is p art in either d ir ec ti o n w o u ld h av e m isl ed o ther trav elers
on t he t ur n p i k e i n t o b e l i e v i n g t h a th e was g o i n g t o c h a n g e l a n e s , whe n i n f a c th e d i d n ot i nt end t o do s o. O n t he otherhand, he di d t echni cal l y exi t t he fr eew ay s o as t o be ens nar ed byt he expr es s l anguage of M anj arr ez, w hi ch i s w hyI re fe r t o t he r es ul tas bi zarr e. T he O kl ahoma L egi s l atur e mayw antt o addr es s t hi s odd s i tuat i on.-2-

A bs ent en banc r econs i der at i on of t he l anguage of M anj arr ez, I am r equi r ed t o agr ee
w i t h m ym aj or i t ycol l eague s . B ut , M anj arr ez doe s appea rt o pr ovi de a ba s i s fort he t i cket i ng of al m os tanyvehi cl e thatpas s es t hr ough t he ca s h t ol l boot hs on ei t her the W i l l R oger s or T u rn e r T u rn p ik e s , e v e n w h e n th o s e v e h ic le s d o n o t c h a n g e la n e s in th e p ro c e s s .