1 ... S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 07- 321- CR
T E R E NC E S T ANL E Y S M I T H AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M CO UN TY CRI M I NA LCO URT NO . 4 O F DENTO N CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I nt r oduc t i on A p p e lla n tT e r e n c e S t a n le yS m it h a p p e a ls h is c o n v ic t io n f o rd r iv in g w h ile i nt oxi ca t ed. I n hi s onl y po i nt , ap pel l antcl ai m s t hatt he t r i alco urt e r r ed by d e n y in g hi s m ot i on t o suppr ess evi dence gather ed subsequen tt o t he i ni t i al2

t r af f i c s t op on t he gr ounds t hat t he ar r es t i ng of f i ce r had no pr oba bl e c aus e o r re a s o n a b l e s u s p i c i o n to s to p o r d e ta i n h i m . W e a ffir m . B a c k g rou n d F a c ts I n t he ear l y ho u rs ofM ar ch, 25 , 20 06 , Ro anoke P ol i ce O f f i cerW i l l i am T a y l o r stop p e d at a n i n terse c ti o n b e h i n d a p p e l l a n t’ s v e h i c l e . A t t h e sto p l i g h t, O ffic e r T a y l o rn o ti c e d th a t a l l th re e b ra k e l a m p so n a p p e l l a n t’sv e h i c l e w e re ac t i vat ed butt hat w hen t he l i ght t ur ned gr ee n and t he veh i cl e b ega n t o m ove f or w ar d, t w o oft he l i ghtsdeact i vat ed w hi l e th e d ri ver ’ s si de br ake l am p r em ai ned i l l um i nat ed. O f f i cer Tay l or bel i eved t hat t he cond i t i on of t he b rake l am p w asa t r af f i c v i ol at i on a nd po se d a p o s s i b l e tr af f i c h az ar d, an d he i m m edi a t e l ys t o p p e d a p p e l l a n t ’ sv e h i c l e t o i n f o r m h i m t h a tt h e l i g h twa snot
w or ki ng pr ope r l y. The r es ul t i ng i nt er ac t i on betw e e n O f f i ce rTayl oran d
a p p e l l a n t l e d to a p p e l l a n t’sa rre s t fo r d ri v i n g w h i l e i n to x i c a te d . A ppe l l antf i l ed a m ot i on t o su ppr es s t he evi den ce obt ai ned f ol l ow i ng t he in it ia l s t o p , c o n t e n d in g t h a tO f f ic e rT a y lo rs t o p p e d h im w it h o u tre a s o n a b le suspi ci on of cr i m i nal act i vi t y orpr obab l e cause t o bel i eve t hathe w as engaged i n cri m i n a l ac ti v i ty. A t t h e su p p res sion h e a ri n g , a p p e l l a n t t e sti fi e d tha t pri o r t o t h e s t o p a n d a r r e s t , h e re p la c e d t h e b u lb f o rt h e d r iv e r ’s s id e t u r n s ig n a l o n h is
ve hi c l e . Appe l l a nt e xp l a i ne d t ha t hi sv e hi c l e w a sa E ur op e a n m od e l BM W 318i th a t re q u i re d E u ro p e a n b u l b si n h i sta i l l i g h ts . B e c a u s e th e s to re d i d n o t c a rry3

t he Eur opean bul b hi s car r equi r ed, he used an A m er i can bul b t hatoper at ed at a h i ghe rw att age. C ons equ ent l y, t he hi ghe rw att agebul b i n t he dr i ver ’ s si de t ai l l i ght const ant l y bur ned br i ghtert han t he ot herl i ghts and m ade t he br ake l i g h t b e l o w i t a p p e a r to b e c o n s ta n tl yi l l u m i n a te d . A f t ert he t r i al courtt ook j udi ci al not i ce t ha t a ppel l ant ’ s vehi cl e w as r e q u i re d b yfe d e ra l l a w to h a v e th re e o p e ra ti o n a l b ra k e l i g h ts , th e c o u rt con cl ude d t hatO f f i ce rTayl ordi d hav e p r oba bl e c aus e t o i ni t i at e t he t r af f i c s t op unde rhi s r ea so nab l e b el i eft hatt he d e fe c ti v e l i ghtw asa t r af f i c v i ol at i on. A cc or di ngl y, t he t r i al cou rt den i ed app el l ant ’ s m ot i on t o su ppr es s. A fte r t he t r i al co urtove r r ul ed hi s m ot i on t o su ppr es s, app el l antch ang ed hi s pl ea t o gui l t y, and t he t r i al courtasses sed a pun i shm ent at18 0 d ays’ conf i nem ent , pr obated fo r tw e l v e m o n th s , a n d a $ 5 0 0 .0 0 fi n e . S t a n d a r d o fR e v i e w W e r evi ew a t r i al court ’ s r ul i ng on a m ot i on t o suppr ess evi dence un der
a b i fu rc a te d s ta n d a rd o f re v i e w . A m a do r v. S tate , 221 S. W . 3d 666, 673 ( Tex. C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ); G uzm a nv. S tate , 955 S . W . 2d 85, 89 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 199 7) . I n r evi ew i ng t he t r i al c o u rt ’ s dec i si on, w e d o noten gag e i n ourow n fa c tu a l re v i e w . Rom ero v. S tate , 800 S . W . 2d 539, 543 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1 9 9 0 ); Best v. S tate , 118 S. W . 3d 857, 861 ( Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h 2003, no pet . ) . The t r i alj udgei s t he so l e t r i eroff ac t and j udge of t he cr edi bi l i t y oft he4

w i tn e s s e sa n d th e w e i g h t to b e g i v e n th e i r te s ti m o n y . W i e de v. S ta te , 214 S .W .3 d 1 7 , 2 4

– 2 5 ( T e x . C r i m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ); S tate v. Ro ss , 32 S . W . 3d 853, 8 5 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 0 ), m odif i ed on other groun ds by S tate v. Cul len , 195 S . W . 3d 69 6 ( Tex . C r i m . A pp. 20 06 ) . Ther ef or e , w e g iv e al m ostt ot al d e f e r e n c e t o t h e t r ia l c o u rt ’s ru lin g so n (1 ) q u e s t io n so f h is t o r ic a l f a c t , e v e n if t he t r i al cou rt ’ s det er m i nat i on of t hos e f ac t s w as not bas ed on an eva l uat i on of
c re d i b i l i tya n d d e m e a n o r, a n d (2 ) a p p l i c a ti o n -o f-l a w -to -fa c t q u e s ti o n sth a t tu rn on an eva l uat i on of cr edi bi l i t y and dem ea nor . A m ado r, 221 S. W . 3d a t673; Mo n tan ez v. S tate , 1 9 5 S .W .3 d 1 0 1 , 1 0 8

– 0 9 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ); Jo hn so nv. S tate , 68 S. W . 3d 64 4, 65 2– 53 ( Tex . C r i m . A pp. 20 02 ) . Bu tw hen app l i ca t i on- of

- l aw - t o- f ac tque st i onsdo not t ur n on t he cr edi bi l i t y a nd de m ea nor oft he w i tn es se s, w e r evi ew t he t r i alco urt ’ s r ul i ngson t hos e q ues t i onsde
n o v o . A m ado r, 2 2 1 S .W .3 d a t 6 7 3 ; E stradav. S tate , 154 S. W . 3d 604, 607 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ); Johnson , 68 S . W . 3d a t652– 53. St at ed ano t her w ay, w hen r evi ew i ng t he t r i alco urt ’ s r ul i ng on a m ot i on t o suppr ess, w e m ustvi ew t he evi dence i n t he l i ght m ostf avor abl e t o t he t r i al
c o u rt’sru l i n g . W

i ede , 2 1 4 S .W .3 d a t 2 4 ; S ta tev. Kelly , 204 S. W . 3d 808, 818 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ). W h e n th e tri a l c o u rt m a k e s e x p l i c i t fa c t fi n d i n g s , w e det er m i ne w het hert he evi den ce , w hen vi ew ed i n t he l i ghtm os tf avo r abl e t o t he tri a l c o u rt’sru l i n g , su p p o rtsth o s e fa c t fi n d i n g s . Kelly , 204 S. W . 3d a t818– 19.5

W e t hen r evi ew t he t r i al court’ s le g a l rul i ng de no vo un l ess i t s expl i ci tf act f i ndi ngst hatar e s upport ed by t he r ec or d a r e a l so di sp os i t i ve oft he l ega l r ul i ng. Id . a t819. W hen t he r ec or d i s si l enton th e re a s o nsf ort he t r i alco urt ’ s r ul i ng, or
w hen t her e ar e no expl i ci tf actf i ndi ngs and nei t herparty tim e l y r equest ed f i ndi ngs and con cl usi ons f r om t he t r i al court , w e i m pl y th e n ecessary f act f i ndi ngst hatw oul d su pportt he t r i alco urt ’ s r ul i ng i ft he evi den ce , vi ew ed i n t he l i g h t m o s t fa v o ra b l e to th e tri a l c o u rt’sru l i n g , su p p o rtsth o s e fi n d i n g s . Id .; see A m ado r, 2 2 1 S .W .3 d a t 6 7 3 ; W i ede , 214 S. W . 3d at25. W e t hen r evi ew t he t r i al co urt ’ s l ega l r ul i ng de novo unl es s t he i m pl i ed f ac tf i ndi ngss upport ed by th e re c o rd a re a l s o d i s p o s i ti v e o f th e l e g a l ru l i n g . Kelly , 204 S. W . 3d a t819. W e m us tupho l d t he t r i alco urt ’ s r ul i ng i f i t i s su pport ed by t he r ec or d a nd
c o rre c t u n d e r a n yth e o ryo f l a w a p p l i c a b l e to th e c a s e e v e n i f th e tri a l c o u rt g a v e th e w ro n g re a s o n fo r i ts ru l i n g . State v. Stevens , 235 S. W . 3d 736, 740 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 7 ); A rm en da ri z v. S tate , 123 S . W .3 d 401, 404 ( Tex. C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 3 ), cert. denied, 5 4 1 U .S . 9 7 4(2 0 0 4 ). C onst it ut i onal ity ofTr aff i c Stops T he Fourt h Am end m entpr ot ec t s aga i ns tunr ea so nab l e s ea r che s and
s e i z u re s b y g o v e rn m e n t o fficia l s . U .S . C ONST . a m e n d . I V ; W i ede , 214 S. W . 3d at24. To s u p p re s s evi den cebe ca us e o fan al l ege d Fo urt h Am end m ent6

vi ol at i on, t he def endan tbear s t he i ni t i al burd en ofpr odu ci ng evi dence t hat
re b u ts th e p re s u m p ti o n o f p ro p e r p o l i c ec o n d u c t. A m ado r, 221 S. W . 3d a t672. A d e fe n d a n t s a ti s fi e sth i sb u r d e n b y e s ta b l i s h i n g th a t a s e a rc h o r s e i z u re o c c u rre d w i th o u t a w a rra n t. Id . O nce t he def end antha s m adet hi s sh ow i ng, t he bur den of pr oof shi f t s t o t he S t at e, w hi ch i s t hen r equi r ed t o est abl i sh t hat t he sear ch or sei zur e w as cond uct ed pur suantt o a w ar r antorw as r easonabl e. S eeT EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . art s. 18. 01, 18 .0 4 (V er non 2005 &Supp. 2 0 0 8 ) (p ro v i d i n g re q u i re m e n ts fo r i s s u a n c e o f a s e a rc h w a rra n t); A m a do r, 221 S .W .3 d a t6 7 2

– 7 3 ; T o rres v. S tate , 182 S . W . 3d 899, 902 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 5 ); F

o rd v. S tate , 1 5 8 S .W .3 d 4 8 8 , 4 9 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 5 ). W het hera se ar ch i s r ea so nab l e i s a q ues t i on ofl aw t hatw e r evi ew de
n o v o . Ko th ev. S tate , 1 5 2 S .W .3 d 5 4 , 6 2 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 4 ). R easonabl eness i s m easur ed by exam i ni ng t he t ot al i t y oft he ci r cum st ances. Id . at63. I t r equ i r es a bal anc i ng of t he publ i c i nt er es t and t he i ndi vi dua l ’ s r i ght to b e fre e fro m a rb i tra ryd e te n ti o n sa n d i n t r u s i o n s . Id . A sear ch cond uct ed
w i t houta w ar r anti s pers e u nr ea so nab l e u nl e s s i t f al l s w i t hi n oneoft he “s pec i f i ca l l y de f i ned an d w el l

- es t abl i sh ed”ex ce pt i onst o t he w ar r ant re q u i re m e n t. Mc G e ev. S tate , 1 0 5 S .W .3 d 6 0 9 , 6 1 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p .), c ert. denied, 5 4 0 U .S . 1 0 0 4(2 0 0 3 ); see Best, 1 1 8 S .W .3 d a t 8 6 2 .7

A det ent i on, as opposed t o an ar r est , m ay be j ust i f i ed on l ess t han pr oba bl e c aus e i f a per so n i s r ea so nab l y s us pec t ed ofcr i m i nalac t i vi t y ba se d on
s p e c i f i c , a rti c u l a b l e fa c ts . Ter ryv. O hio , 392 U. S. 1, 22, 88 S . Ct . 1868 , 1 8 8 0 (1 9 6 8 ); Car

m ouchev. Sta te , 10 S. W . 3d 323, 328 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 20 00 ) . A n of f i cercondu ct s a l aw f ul t em por ary det ent i on w hen he orshe has
re a s o n a b l e s u s p i c i o n to b e l i e v e th a t a n i n d i v i d u a l i s v i o l a ti n g th e l a w . F o rd, 158 S. W . 3d at492. Reas ona bl e su sp i ci on exi st s w hen , bas ed on t he t ot al i t y oft he ci r cum st ances, t he of f i cerhas speci f ic , art i cul abl e f act s t hatw hen com bi ned
w it h r a t io n a l in f e r e n c e sf r o m t h o s e f a c t s , w o u ld le a d h im t o re a s o n a b ly
c o n c lu d e t h a ta p a rt ic u la rp e r s o n is , h a sb e e n , o rs o o n w ill b e e n g a g e d in
c ri m i n a l a c ti v i ty . Id . Thi s i s an obj ec t i ve st an dar d t hatdi sr ega r dsan y subj ect i ve i nt entoft he of f i cerm aki ng t he st op and l ooks sol el y t o w het heran o bj e c ti v e b a s i sfo r th e s to p e x i s ts . Id . Ther ef or e, i n s t oppi ng v ehi cl esf oran i nve st i gat i ve det ent i on bas ed on a t r af f i c vi ol at i on, t he S t at e need not pr ove t hatt he det ai nee act ual l y com m i t t ed
a tra ffic v i o l a ti o n . D rag o v. S ta te, 553 S.W .2 d 3 7 5 , 377 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1 9 7 7 ); D eL o sSa n to s v. S ta te, N o. 02

- 07

- 00 13 5- C R , 20 08 W L 17 77 98 8, at *3 ( Tex . A pp. — FortW ort h A pr . 17 , 20 08 , no pet . ) ( m em . op. , notdesi gnated f o rp u b lic a t io n ). T h e S t a t e m u s to n lys h o w t h a t t h e o f f ic e rre a s o n a b ly
s u s p e c t e d t h a t th e d ri v e r w a sc o m m i ttin g a tra ffic v i o l a ti o n . D e L osSantos ,8

20 08 W L 17 77 98 8, at*3 . I f t he S t at e est abl i shes r easonabl e suspi ci on, t hen t he st op do es notvi ol at e t he Fou rt h A m endm enteven i f , upon f urt her i n v e s ti g a ti o n , i t i sd i s c o v e r e d th a t n o tra ffic v i o l a ti o n a c tu a l l yo c c u rre d . S ee D rag o, 5 5 3 S .W .2 d a t 3 7 7 ; D eL o sSa n to s, 2008 W L1777 988, a t*3. A ppl i cabl e Law Th e p e rt i ne ntp ort i on o fTe xa sTr a ns po rt a t i on Cod e s e c t i on 5 4 7 . 323 p rov i d e s th a t:

(d ) A s to p l a m p s h a l l e m i t a re d o r a m b e r l i g h t, o r a c o l o r b e tw e e n re d a n d a m b e r, th a t i s : ( 1) vi si bl e i n nor m al sunl i ght ata di sta n c e o f atl east 300 f ee tf r om t he r ea roft he veh i cl e; an d ( 2) di sp l aye d w hen t he veh i cl e se rvi cebr ak e i s app l i ed. T EX . T RANSP . C ODE A NN . § 547 . 323 ( Ver no n 1999) . A ddi t i ona l l y, an ope r at or m ay not st op or su dde nl y dec r ea se t he sp ee d of t he veh i cl e w i t houtf i r stgi vi ng a s t o p s i g n a lb yl i g h ti n g s i g n a l l a m p s . Id. § 545 . 105 –06 ( V er non 1 9 9 9 ). T e x a s l a w a l s o r e q u i r e sv e h i c l e st o c o mp l ywi t h f e d e r a l s t a ndar ds. Id. § 5 4 7 .3 2 1 5 ( V e rno n 1 9 9 9 ). F e d e ral sta n d a rds req u i re c a rs l e ss tha n eigh ty i n c h e s w i d e to h a v e th re e s to p l a m p so n th e re a r o f th e c a r. See Star r i n v. S ta te, N o . 0 2 -0 4 -0 0 3 6 0 -C R , 2 0 0 5 W L3 3 4 3 8 7 5 , a t * 1 ( T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h D ec. 8, 20 05 , no pet . ) ( m em . op. , notdesi gnated f orpubl i cat i on) . The t r i al9

c o u rttoo kj u d i c i a l n o ti c e tha t be c a u se ap p e l la n t’ s c a r w a s l e ss tha n eigh ty i n c h e s w i d e , i t w a sre q u i re d to h a v e th re e o p e ra ti o n a l b ra k e l i g h ts . D i sc us si on I n hi s so l e p oi nt , ap pel l antco m pl ai ns t hat t he t r i al cou rt er r ed by d eny i ng hi s m ot i on t o suppr ess evi dence ob t ai ned f r om t he t r af f i c st op becau se O f f i cer Tayl orha d ne i t herpr oba bl e c aus e t hatheha d be en, orw asab outt o be i nvol ved i n cr i m i nal act i vi t y norr easonabl e suspi ci on t hat cr i m i nal act i vi t y w as af oot . Spec i f i ca l l y, ap p e l l a n tco nt end s t hatt he onl y i ss ue i s w het herhe
com m i t t ed a “t i cket abl e” t r af f i c of f ense because hi s r ear br ake l am p r em ai ned
con t i nua l l y i l l um i nat ed. How eve r , t he i ss ue her e i s notw het herap pel l ant com m i t t ed a t r af f i c vi ola tio n ; r at her , t he i ssue i s w het herO f f i cerTayl orhad
re a s o n a b l e s u s p i c i o n to s to p a p p e l l a n t fo r a tra ffic o ffe n s e . S e eD rag o, 553 S .W .2 d a t 3 7 7 ; D eL o sSa n to s, 2008 W L1777 988, a t*3. O ffi ce r s hav e aut hor i t y t o st op and br i ef l y det ai n per so ns w h o a re s u s p e c t e d o fc r im in a l a c t iv i t yo n le s sin f o r m a t io n t h a n isc o n s t it u t io n a lly
re q u i re d f o r p r o b a b l e c a u s e to a rre s t. D a vi sv. S ta te, 947 S . W . 2d 240, 244 ( T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ); T u cker v. S ta te, 1 8 3 S . W . 3 d 5 0 1 , 5 0 8 ( Tex. A p p .— F o rt W o rth 2 0 0 5 , n o p e t.). T e m p o ra ryi n v e s ti g a ti v e d e t e n ti o n sa re app r opr i at e w hen of f i ce r s hav e “ sp ec i f i c a rt i cul abl e f ac t s, w hi ch, pr e mi se d upo n [ t he of f i cer ’ s] exper i ence and per sonal know l edge, w hen cou pl ed w i t h l ogi cal10

i n fe re n c e sfro m th o s e fa c ts w o u l d w a rra n t th e i n tru s i o n o n th e d e ta i n e e .” D a vi s, 9 4 7 S .W .2 d a t 2 4 4 ; T u cker, 18 3 S . W . 3d at50 8. A pol i ce of f i cerhas t h e a u t h o r it yt o s t o p a n d t e m p o r a r ilyd e t a in a d r iv e rw h o h a sv io la t e d a t r a f f ic l a w . A rm itag ev. S ta te, 6 3 7 S . W . 2 d 9 3 6 , 9 3 9 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 8 2 ); L em m o n sv. S ta te, 1 3 3 S .W .3 d 7 5 1 , 7 5 6 ( T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 2 0 0 4 , p e t.
r e f ’d ). F u rt h e r , b e c a u s e a v io la t io n o ft h e t r a f f ic la w sc o n s t it u t e sp r o b a b le cause t o ar r est t he vi ol at or , t he need f or r easonabl e suspi ci on t o st op t he dr i ver i so b v i a te d . S ee T EX . T RANSP . C ODE A NN . § 5 4 3 .0 0 1 (V e rn o n 1 9 9 9 ); Lem m ons, 1 3 3 S .W .3 d a t 7 5 6 ; S ta tev. A ya l a, 98 1 S . W . 2d 47 4, 47 6 ( Tex . A pp. — El Paso 1 9 9 8 , p e t. re f’d ). A ppe l l antar gue s t hathi s veh i cl e d i d not v i o l a te t r ans port at i on c ode
s e c t io n 5 4 7 .3 2 3 b e c a u s e t h e t h r e e re q u ir e d b r a k e la m p so n h isv e h ic le
a c ti v a te d a n d d e a c ti v a te d a sre q u i re d b yl a w . See T EX . T RANSP . C ODE A NN . § 5 47 . 32 3. A ppel l antt est i f i ed t hatt he dr i ver ’ s si de br ake l i ght onl y appear ed t o be const ant l y i l l um i nat ed w hen t he servi ce br ake w as deact i vat ed because ofa hi gh w at t ag e t ur n- si gnal l i ght t hatcont i nuo usl y shone t hr oug h t he br ake lig h t . H o w e v e r , O f f ic e rT a y lo rt e s t if ie d t h a t h e s t o p p e d t h e v e h ic le b e c a u s e it app ea r ed t hatt he dr i ver ’ s si de br ak e l i ghtw as c o n s ta n t l y i l l um i nat ed and , t her ef or e, pr es ent ed a r oad w ay haz ar d be ca us e o fa m al f unc t i on. W het hert he st op w asba se d on t he ac t ualm al f unc t i on oft h e d ri ver ’ s si de br ak e l i ghtor11

me r e l yt h e a p p e a r a n c e o ft h e b r a k e l i g h t ’ sma l f u n c t i o n i si n c o n s e q u e n t i al bec aus e t he r el eva ntpa rtoft he st at ut e st at est hata “s t opl am p s hal l em i t ” t he
r equi si t e l i ght “w hen t he vehi cl e servi ce br ake i s appl i ed. ” Se eid . Thus , t he f u n c t io n o ft h e b r a k e lig h tist o s ig n a l t h a tt h e v e h ic le is s t o p p in g w h e n itis , in f ac t , s t oppi ng. I ft he veh i cl e’ s br ak e l i ght s ar e c ont i nuous l y l i t , orap pea rt o be
c o n t in u o u s lylit , t h e n t h e v e h ic le c a n n o tp r o p e r ly i n d i c a t e w h e n itisa c t u a lly
s to p p i n g . S e eS ta tev. F lem i ng, 8 4F . A p p ’x3 9 6 , 3 9 6

– 9 7 (5 t h C i r. 2 0 0 3 ),
c ert. deni

e d , 541 U . S. 1018 ( 200 4) ( notde si gna t ed f orpub l i ca t i on) ( hol di ng t hatpr obab l e cause exi st ed w he n th e o f f i cerst opp ed a dr i verw hose br ake l i ght s w er e c ons t a n tl y i l l um i nat ed i n vi ol at i on ofTexa s Tr ans port at i on Code
s e c ti o n 5 4 7 .3 2 3 ). A br ak e l i ghtt hati s con st an tl y on a nd t hatca nnots i gna l w hen t he
ve hi c l e i s b r a k i ng d oe sn otc om pl y w i t h t r a ns po rt a t i on c od e s e c t i on 547. 323. S ee T EX . T RANSP . C ODE A NN . § 5 47. 323 ; F lem i ng, 84 F . App ’ x a t396– 97. Beca us e Of f i ce r Tayl or had a r ea so nab l e s us pi ci on t o be l i evea t r af f i c v i ol at i on
w asoc cur r i ng w hen heobs erved t he veh i cl e’ s def ec t i ve br ak e l i ght s, t he d e c i sion to s to p the v e h i c l e w a s rea so n a b l e an d d i d n o t vi o l a te th e F o u rt h A m e n d m e n t. S e eF lem i ng, 84 F. A pp’ x at39 6– 97 . W e hol d t hatt he t r i al
c o u rt d id n o t e r r b y d e n y in g a p p e lla n t ’s m o t io n t o s u p p r e s s a n d o v e r r u le h iss o le p o i n t.12 C onc l us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d a p p e l l a n t’ss o l e p o i n t, w e a ffir m th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

T E R R I E L I VI NGS T ON J U S T I C E PA N EL: CA YC E, C. J. ; LI V I N G STO N , an d HO LM A N , JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Aug us t14, 2008