Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Roybal

Utah Supreme Court

Decided May 14, 2010No. 20080776Published

1DissentNehring, Justice

¶ 26 I respectfully dissent because I believe that under the totality of the circumstances, Sergeant Ledford did not have reasonable suspicion to stop Mr. Roybal.

¶ 27 In order to make a lawful traffic stop, an officer must have reasonable articulable suspicion that the subject of the stop is involved in criminal activity. See State v. Kohl, 2000 UT 35, ¶ 11, 999 P.2d 7. The majority correctly notes that while the articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion are “most frequently based on an investigating officer’s own observations and inferences,” in some circumstances, an officer may…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Alabama v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. State v. KohlUtah Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Kaysville City v. MulcahyCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1997
  4. State v. CaseCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1994
  5. State v. RoybalCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API