court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); BIC; Resp. Br.
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
Stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, given trial court findings that “Johnson’s vehicle crossed the fog line and drifted across the lane to the area of the center line, weaved from the right to the left while negotiating curves in the road, moved close enough to the center line on a curve to cause concern that it might collide with an oncoming vehicle, and either drove on or over the center line.”
¶13 We acknowledge that the weaving in this case was less pronounced and occurred with less frequency over a much greater distance than the weaving in Post. However, the totality of the circumstances—which include the time of the stop (less than an hour after bar time), the fact that Johnson’s vehicle came close to an on-coming vehicle, and driving on or over the center line in town—supported a reasonable suspicion that Johnson was driving while intoxicated.[2] Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s denial of Johnson’s suppression motion, and the judgment of conviction.
