From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hamilton

Supreme Court of Utah
Nov 21, 1985
710 P.2d 174 (Utah 1985)

Summary

upholding warrantless search and arrest of suspect on third-party premises for failure to yield misdemeanor because of hot pursuit exception

Summary of this case from Goines v. James

Opinion

No. 20203.

November 21, 1985.

Appeal from the Third District Court, Salt Lake County, Jay E. Banks, J.

Lisa Remal, Salt Lake City, for defendant and appellant.

David L. Wilkinson, Atty. Gen., J. Stephen Mikita, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.


The defendant was convicted of three class B misdemeanors after trial before a justice of the peace. He challenged the verdict and was subsequently convicted of the same three charges (failure to yield the right of way, interference with a police officer, and driving on a suspended license) after trial de novo in the district court. He argues that his warrantless arrest violated the fourth amendment of the federal constitution. We affirm.

The State argued in its brief that article VIII, section 9, of the Utah Constitution prohibits an appeal in a case beginning in justice court unless the constitutionality of a statute is challenged. Since July 1, 1985, the constitutional provision on which the State relies has been supplanted by a completely revised judicial article, which does not contain the limitation formerly a part of section 9. In the absence of any limitation, the provisions of U.C.A., 1953, § 78-3-5 (Supp. 1985) govern. That statute reads, in part, as follows:

Appeals shall lie from the final judgments of justices of the peace in civil and criminal cases to the district courts, on both questions of law and fact, with such limitations and restrictions as are or may be provided by law; and the decisions of the district courts on these appeals shall be final, except in cases involving a constitutional issue.

Since the defendant raises a constitutional issue in this case, we will review his claims.

The arresting officer in this case observed the defendant committing a class B misdemeanor traffic offense, failure to yield the right of way. He followed the defendant in order to make a stop, but the defendant's vehicle turned into and stopped on private property at approximately the same time the officer caught up with it. The defendant refused to speak to the officer and left the immediate area to lock himself in a nearby shed, apparently used in a hay selling operation. The officer then arrested the defendant for the traffic violation. The defendant claims that the arrest was invalid under the rationale of Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980), because it was a warrantless invasion of the defendant's home for the purposes of making an arrest absent exigent circumstances. That characterization is not justified by the facts. Specifically, the officer was literally in "hot pursuit" of a person who had been observed committing an offense, albeit a minor one. The pursuit legitimately led the officer onto private property (the record contains no indication that the premises constituted the defendant's residence). When the defendant failed to cooperate with the officer's investigation of the traffic offense he had witnessed, the officer was justified in making an arrest to permit investigation and prosecution. The arrest was valid. Therefore, the defendant's conviction of the charges of interfering with an officer and of driving with a suspended license, which arose out of and after the arrest, are also valid. The convictions are affirmed.

HALL, C.J., and STEWART, HOWE and ZIMMERMAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State v. Hamilton

Supreme Court of Utah
Nov 21, 1985
710 P.2d 174 (Utah 1985)

upholding warrantless search and arrest of suspect on third-party premises for failure to yield misdemeanor because of hot pursuit exception

Summary of this case from Goines v. James

In State v. Hamilton, 710 P.2d 174 (Utah 1985), the Utah Supreme Court upheld a conviction for a traffic offense where police arrested a motorist after they observed him fail to yield the right-of-way, drive onto private property, and lock himself into a storage shed.

Summary of this case from State v. Beavers
Case details for

State v. Hamilton

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF UTAH, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT, v. KENNETH M. HAMILTON, DEFENDANT…

Court:Supreme Court of Utah

Date published: Nov 21, 1985

Citations

710 P.2d 174 (Utah 1985)

Citing Cases

State v. Stevens

Our jurisdiction to consider this appeal is determined by U.C.A., 1953, § 78-3-5 (Supp. 1985), the appeal…

State v. Ramirez

The Utah Supreme Court has upheld a warrantless arrest on private property for class B misdemeanors on the…