After a single-car crash in Framingham, a police officer arrived on scene and asked the driver if he had been drinking.
The driver allegedly stated that he had seven beers that evening.
The officer arrested the driver and charged him with OUI.
Prior to trial, the man’s attorney sought to suppress the driver’s statement.
According to the lawyer, the officer should have mirandized the driver prior to questioning.
A district court judge denied the motion.
The case went to trial and the defendant lost.
He appealed, arguing that the district court judge erred in denying the motion to suppress.
In a slip opinion issued today, the Appeals Court affirmed the lower court’s ruling:
Here, the officer’s conduct fell squarely within the community caretaking exception. He was patrolling a downtown area at night and saw (1) an immobilized vehicle in the middle of an intersection with significant damage and deployed airbags, (2) the defendant in the driver’s seat, and (3) a dislodged fire hydrant across the road. It was plainly reasonable for the officer to believe that the safety of the defendant and any nearby members of the public was jeopardized. See Evans, 436 Mass. at 373 (officer approaching car with flashing blinker in breakdown lane on highway fell under community caretaking exception). Moreover, the officer was permitted to ask the defendant if he had been drinking. See Fisher, 86 Mass. App. Ct. at 52 (officer’s “effort to confirm whether emergency medical assistance is required or to determine the nature of the individual’s apparent illness or impairment is not invalid because the acts taken by the officer also serve to uncover evidence of criminal activity”).
The full text of the slip opinion is attached below.