A man who was charged with DUI is challenging his arrest because he says there was no probable cause.
Erty Yerten appealed his criminal conviction of 1 count of driving while impaired as a misdemeanor and challenged the trial court’s refusal to rule on a motion to suppress filed after the court’s designated motions deadline.
He argued that the review of the motion would show that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle.
A news release from the Supreme Court states that it disagrees with Yerten’s motion and affirmed the lower court’s decision.
The officer who arrested Yerten testified that he was on patrol and had heard over police radio of a “possible drunk driver” on Route 1.
The officer located the driver who was later identified as Yerten.
Rather than pulling to the right side of the road, according to the officer, Yerten executed a left turn at an intersection, disobeyed a red light, and pulled into a gas station.
The officer observed that Yerten had a flush face, bloodshot eyes, and a strong odor of alcohol from his breath and person.
Yerten argued that the tip was unreliable because it had come from an anonymous source and that the officer received it through the intermediary of an unknown dispatcher… and that the officer did not witness any suspicious or illegal activity before pulling him over.
The Supreme Court has affirmed the judgment of conviction and affirmed that the officer had reasonable suspicion to pull Yerten over.