Criminal Practice — DWI – Traffic Stop – Other Officers’ Observations

State v. Shaw (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-07-1180, 13 pp.) (Mark Davis, J.) Appealed from Mecklenburg County Superior Court (Sharon Tracey Barrett, J.) N.C. App.

Holding: At 12:30 a.m. on a Saturday in an area where numerous establishments served alcohol late into the night and where a high number of alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes had occurred, Officers Morales and Wallin saw defendant’s vehicle weave several times outside of its lane of travel. Since Officers Morales and Wallin radioed this information to Officer Gormican, Officer Gormican had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant’s vehicle.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence that resulted from the traffic stop.

We reject defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in considering evidence of the statements made by Officers Morales and Wallin to Officer Gormican based on the theory that these statements were hearsay. Officer Gormican testified that he was contacted by Officers Morales and Wallin, who told him that they had observed defendant’s vehicle “weaving outside its lane of travel several times.” Officer Gormican therefore followed defendant and initiated the traffic stop. As in State v. Gray, 55 N.C. App. 568, 286 S.E.2d 357 (1982), his receipt of this information justified his reasonable suspicion that defendant was driving while impaired, which in turn justified stopping defendant’s vehicle.

Because we conclude that Officer Gormican’s testimony as to the information he received from Officers Morales and Wallin was nonhearsay, we reject defendant’s argument that her Confrontation Clause rights were violated.

Affirmed.