The Fifth District Court of Appeal of Florida ruled on Friday that a Florida federal judge improperly applied the probable cause standard in suppressing evidence from a DUI investigation of Michelle Lynn Howard. The court unanimously reversed and remanded the Seminole County court’s order that granted Howard’s motion to suppress evidence obtained following a traffic stop and subsequent DUI investigation.
In the 13-page opinion, Judge Joe Boatright clarified that the officer had reasonable suspicion to initiate the traffic stop based on Howard’s erratic driving, including driving in two lanes simultaneously for approximately 15 seconds before hitting a curb. The officer also had reasonable suspicion to detain Howard for a DUI investigation after observing signs of impairment, such as bloodshot eyes, a strong odor of alcohol, and slurred speech.
The opinion emphasized that in DUI investigations, officers make judgment calls based on observable facts, rather than requiring probable cause at every stage. The ruling stressed that the officer acted appropriately when he stopped Howard for potential traffic violations, as her driving violated Florida traffic laws requiring motorists to remain within a single lane.
“We reverse the trial court’s order suppressing the evidence obtained as a result of the stop of Howard’s vehicle and the subsequent DUI investigation,” the court stated. “The trial court erred when it ruled there was no legal basis for the traffic stop, and also when it found there was neither reasonable suspicion for the DUI investigation nor probable cause for the arrest.”
The case arose from a traffic stop on September 21, 2021, when a Casselberry police officer observed Howard driving in both the center and right lanes simultaneously. The officer initiated the stop after Howard continued driving in the lanes for a significant distance before pulling into a parking lot. Upon approaching Howard’s vehicle, the officer noticed signs of impairment, including slurred speech and glassy, bloodshot eyes.
The trial court had previously suppressed the evidence from the stop, citing a lack of probable cause to justify the traffic stop. The lower court also questioned the officer’s authority to administer a breath test after transporting Howard to a nearby jail outside Casselberry’s jurisdiction. However, the appellate court disagreed, noting that the officer acted within the bounds of established law and the ongoing investigation exception, which allows for DUI investigations to continue beyond jurisdictional limits.
The appellate court’s decision affirms that officers only need reasonable suspicion to justify traffic stops and subsequent DUI investigations. The court also highlighted that the officer’s actions were consistent with established legal precedents, including State v. Parker and State v. Torres, which clarified the application of reasonable suspicion and jurisdictional authority in DUI cases.
The case is State of Florida v. Michelle Lynn Howard, case number 5D2024-0176, in the Fifth District Court of Appeal.
