Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Ramon Guerrero v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 08-08-00286-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; May 28, 2010; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Ramon Guerrero was charged with felony possession of marijuana and initially filed a motion to suppress evidence, which he later waived. The jury convicted him and imposed a thirteen-year sentence and a $7,000 fine. The case stems from a traffic stop initiated by Deputy Beltran on January 16, 2007, after observing Guerrero's van pass another vehicle in an active school zone. Although Beltran believed passing was illegal in that area, it was not designated as a "no passing" zone. Upon stopping Guerrero, Beltran found him without a driver’s license or insurance, but with a Texas identification card. Noticing Guerrero's nervousness and the strong odor of marijuana, Beltran conducted a warrant check, discovering three outstanding warrants against Guerrero and a suspended license. After confirming the warrants, Beltran arrested Guerrero and called for a K-9 unit, which alerted to the van. A search revealed marijuana in cardboard boxes inside the vehicle. Guerrero's appeal argues that the marijuana evidence should be suppressed due to an unlawful detention, claiming violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and Texas constitutional protections. The court uses a bifurcated standard of review for motions to suppress, deferring to the trial court's findings on credibility and historical facts. Rulings on mixed questions of law and fact, not involving witness credibility, are reviewed de novo. A law enforcement officer can lawfully stop a motorist for a traffic violation observed in their presence. The stop is reasonable if there is probable cause for believing a violation occurred. Two inquiries determine the reasonableness of an investigative detention: whether the officer's action was justified at its inception and whether it was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference. In this case, the officer, Beltran, observed the appellant completely pass another vehicle in an active school zone, which is deemed a "no-passing" zone under the El Paso Municipal Code. The code specifies that school crossing zones must be marked, and Beltran affirmed that such a sign was present at the stop location. The code prohibits passing another vehicle in the same direction while in an active school crossing zone, and this violation is classified as a misdemeanor. Consequently, Beltran was authorized to detain the appellant for further investigation, leading to the conclusion that the stop was justified. The trial court's judgment is affirmed.