Title: State v. Haislip
Citation: 362 N.C. 499
Docket Number: 513PA07
State: north-carolina
Issuer: north-carolina Supreme Court
Date: October 10, 2008

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. SHANNON DENISE HAISLIP
No. 513PA07 
FILED: 10 OCTOBER 2008
Search and Seizure–motion to suppress–remand for findings and
conclusions
A driving while impaired (DWI) case is remanded to the
superior court for written findings and conclusions sufficient to
resolve all issues raised by defendant’s motion to suppress
evidence used to convict her of DWI based upon her contention
that the evidence was procured as the result of an
unconstitutional motor vehicle checkpoint.
On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 of
a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeals, 186 N.C. App. 275,
651 S.E.2d 243 (2007), reversing a judgment entered on 23 May
2006, by Judge William C. Griffin, Jr. in the Superior Court in
Pitt County, and remanding the case to the trial court.  Heard in
the Supreme Court 8 September 2008.
Roy Cooper, Attorney General, by Kathryne E. Hathcock, 
Assistant Attorney General, for the State-appellant.
The Robinson Law Firm, P.A., by Leslie S. Robinson, for
defendant-appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The State of North Carolina seeks review of the
unanimous Court of Appeals decision reversing the denial of
defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence used to convict her
for driving while impaired and remanding for appropriate findings
of fact and conclusions of law as to the constitutionality of a
checkpoint.  The State asserts that the Court of Appeals erred in
holding that (1) defendant was “stopped” within the meaning of
the Fourth Amendment; and (2) the constitutionality of the
checkpoint is at issue, in that defendant evaded the checkpoint.  
-2-
On review of a motion to suppress evidence, an
appellate court determines whether the trial court’s findings of
fact are supported by the evidence and whether the findings of
fact support the conclusions of law.  State v. Wynne, 329 N.C.
507, 524, 406 S.E.2d 812, 821 (1991) (citing State v. Williams,
308 N.C. 47, 301 S.E.2d 335, cert. denied, 464 U.S. 865, 78 L.
Ed. 2d 177 (1983)).  The trial court’s findings of fact “are
conclusive on appeal if supported by competent evidence, even if
the evidence is conflicting.”  State v. Buchanan, 353 N.C. 332,
336, 543 S.E.2d 823, 826 (2001) (citations and internal quotation
marks omitted).  The conclusions of law, however, are reviewed de
novo.  State v. Hyatt, 355 N.C. 642, 653, 566 S.E.2d 61, 69
(2002) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1133, 154 L.
Ed. 2d 823 (2003).  The trial court’s findings of fact are
critical to our substantive review of an appellant’s arguments.
Although the trial transcript indicates that the trial
judge believed defendant “wasn’t snared by the checkpoint,” the
transcript is devoid of any formal, specific findings of fact or
conclusions of law as to what transpired on the evening of
defendant’s arrest.  Thus, we disagree with the Court of Appeals’
statement that the trial court made a “finding that Defendant was
not stopped by the checkpoint.”  State v. Haislip, 186 N.C. App.
275, 280, 651 S.E.2d 243, 247 (2007).  Indeed, although the trial
judge stated at the very end of the proceedings that he had
“written out in hand [his] findings and conclusions on the
evidentiary hearing . . . with respect to the motion to suppress
the evidence,” the transcript reveals no ruling at all on the
-3-
motion to suppress, and no such order was included in the record
presented either to this Court or the Court of Appeals.  See id.
at 278, 651 S.E.2d at 246 (“No such [written] order appears in
the record on appeal.”).  
Because we conclude that the record before us is
inadequate to permit appellate review of the questions of law
presented by the State’s appeal, in that the record contains no
order or ruling on defendant’s motion to suppress, the decision
of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded with
direction to further remand to the Superior Court in Pitt County
for written findings of fact and conclusions of law sufficient to
resolve all issues raised by the motion to suppress.
VACATED AND REMANDED.