Opinion ID: 2165030
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: july 3, 2005, 3:15 a.m.

Text: The testimony at the hearing on the motion to suppress and at trial reveals the following: On July 3, 2005, at approximately 3:15 a.m., Sgt. Walter Groves was on patrol in a marked sheriff's cruiser driving northbound on U.S. Highway 75 in Washington County, Nebraska. Groves testified that while on patrol, he noticed a vehicle, which was later determined to be driven by Bakewell, headed southbound on Highway 75. After noting that the vehicle appeared to have crossed the centerline, Groves turned southbound and began to follow the vehicle. After following the vehicle for approximately 2 to 2 ½ miles, Groves noted that on several occasions, the vehicle slowed down, almost came to a complete stop in the middle of the road, and eventually pulled off onto the shoulder of the highway. We note that in his reply brief, Bakewell suggests the officer's tenacious trailing of Bakewell's vehicle likely contributed to the manner in which [he] pulled to the side of the road. [1] However, we have reviewed the video of this incident taken from a camera in Groves' cruiser and, while it is not possible to precisely estimate the distance between Groves' cruiser and Bakewell's vehicle, our review shows nothing that would corroborate Bakewell's contention. Groves testified that [w]hen the vehicle pulled over to the side I pulled in behind the vehicle, activated my emergency lights for safety reasons and then exited my patrol car and made contact with the driver. Groves indicated that he pulled in behind the vehicle to conduct a safety check of the vehicle, make sure that everything was okay and there was [sic] no problems. Groves testified that the first question he asked of Bakewell was whether everything was okay. In the video, Bakewell can be heard to respond that he was lost. On cross-examination, Groves acknowledged that he had seen Bakewell's arm extended out of his car window prior to Groves' pulling off the highway and that this action was consistent with an effort by [Bakewell] to waive [sic] [Groves] around. A review of the video confirms Groves' version of these events, except that Bakewell's arm extended out of his car window is not visible on the video. The county court denied Bakewell's motion to suppress, finding that Groves' actions fell within the community caretaking exception to the Fourth Amendment. The district court affirmed. Bakewell appealed. We moved this case to our docket pursuant to our authority to regulate the dockets of this court and that of the Nebraska Court of Appeals. [2]