The Fellow Officer Rule and It's
Implications in DUI Cases - continued
"Necessary Assistance" In
some states, probable cause can be transferred not merely
from fellow officers to one another, but also from a person
enlisted to aid in an officer under a "necessary
assistance" statute. Such statutes allow a police
officer making a lawful arrest to command the assistance or
aid of any person he deems necessary to make an arrest. The
person commanded to aid the officer then has the same
authority to arrest as the police officer has. For example,
the State was able to salvage its arrest in State v.
Eldridge, 565 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), by relying
on Florida's necessary assistance statute, section 901.18.
The officer who stopped Eldridge did so in connection with a
theft investigation. While he was stopped, the officer
noticed indicia of alcohol intoxication and called in a
back-up officer. The first officer attended to the theft
issue while the second officer made the arrest for DUI. The
Florida appellate court held that the arrest was valid even
though the second officer did not witness Eldridge driving,
because the second officer had been summoned under the
necessary assistance statute and thus had the same authority
as the first officer. However, the doctrine is not without
limits. In Riehle v. State, Dept of highway Safety, and
motor Vehicles, 684 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), the
defendant was stopped by an auxiliary state trooper, whom
Florida law specifically provided had no arrest powers. The
auxiliary trooper called in a supervisor who performed
roadside exercises and then took the defendant into custody
for DUI. The same court decided Eldridge concluded
that the arrest here was not valid, specifically
distinguished Eldridge on the basis that the original
officer who stopped Eldridge had arrest authority that could
be transferred to the assisting officer, whereas the
auxiliary trooper who stopped Riehle had no arrest authority
and thus had nothing to transfer to the assisting officer. So
in our example above, If officer Smith lacked statutory
authority to arrest Defendant, but Officer Jones possessed
such authority, the arrest is not saved by the necessary
assistance statute even though it was effected by Officer
Jones who had arrest authority; Smith, as the summoning
officer, had no authority that he could transfer. Thus,
where the state relies on such a provision to justify the
arrest of your client, the first order of business is to
determine whether the officer who sought assistance had
authority to make a DUI arrest in the just instance. Conclusion Because
of the increasing reliance across the country on
specialized, DUI-trained officers to flesh out probable
cause determinations in DUI cases, the practitioner is well
advised to become familiar with the interrelated laws
regarding who must possess probable cause information to
effectuate a valid DUI arrest. It provides fertile grounds
for challenges to any DUI prosecution.
|