Resnick avoids charges of ''fleeing''; will change not-guilty plea Monday
When are multiple 911 calls reporting erratic driving not "reasonable suspicion"?
When is a police officer saying "you are not free to go yet" not a lawful order for you to stop?
Perhaps when your name is Alice Robie Resnick, and you are an Democrat Ohio State Supreme Court Justice.
Matthew Reger, Bowling Green's city prosecutor, announced yesterday that Justice Resnick will not face any additional charges for fleeing and eluding or failure to comply with a police officer because she was never told she was under arrest and the troopers never made a lawful order for her to stop.
"She asked to leave several times and both officers indicated that she could not leave," Mr. Reger said in a statement. "But these were not orders based upon reasonable suspicion that a crime had occurred. Without reasonable suspicion of a crime, such as DUI, the officers' request not to leave was merely that, a request, not a lawful order."
"I understand it’s not what people want," Reger said. "Sometimes you make calls that are not popular."
From the Columbus Dispatch:
- Columbus lawyer Eric Yavitch called it "solid police work." Yavitch, of Yavitch & Palmer, represents hundreds of drunken-driving clients a year. He agreed that probable cause is needed to make an arrest but said only reasonable suspicion is necessary to justify a traffic stop.
"They weren’t even sure they had the right person," Yavitch said of the initial police contact with Resnick.
Yet Yavitch wondered if Resnick’s driving off could set a precedent.
"Others might say, ‘I just did what the judge did,’ " he said.
Dispatch readers and some defense attorneys are asking whether Resnick was held to a different standard.
In one Internet conversation, a lawyer joked that his clients would have been shot at for fleeing.
Lewis Katz, a Case Western Reserve University law professor who is also a criminal-law expert and author of "Ohio Arrest Search and Seizure," told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that if police didn't smell alcohol or have other evidence, they would not have probable cause for an arrest. Katz said, however, that police telling Resnick to stay put "probably was a legal order."
Resnick was eventually stopped on Interstate 75 south of Bowling Green just after 2 p.m. Monday. She was arrested after taking a breath test at the scene, and recording a blood-alcohol level of .216 percent, more than 2½ times the legal limit of .08 percent. According to news reports, the test was conducted more than two hours after her initial stop in Bowling Green.
In a newly released police videotape of the encounter with Resnick at the gas station, Bowling Green Police Patrolman Mark Hanson is shown knocking on her car window for about 6 seconds before she responds.
- "I need to talk to you," he tells her.
"I’m a Supreme Court justice," she says. "I’m Justice Alice Robie Resnick. I’m late. I’m OK."
Hanson remarks that Resnick’s eye is a little bloodshot.
"No, I’m fine, I’m fine," she says.
Asked whether she had been drinking, Resnick says, "No, I’m not intoxicated."
When Resnick is asked, "Can you let us do one test on you?" she declines. "I’m going to go. I’m going," she says before driving back onto I-75.
Ohio’s Code of Judicial Conduct specifically advises judges to respect and comply with the law, always act in a way that promotes public confidence and not "allude to" their judgeship during police traffic stops. Contact information for the Supreme Court follows:
- The Supreme Court of Ohio
Chris Davy
65 South Front Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215-3431
800.826.9010
614.387.9000
BG city prosecutor Matthew Reger said Thursday that Resnick, who according to the Toledo Blade has a past driving record for "weaving" and is a past member of Alcoholics Anonymous, is expected to plead guilty or no contest in Bowling Green Municipal Court at 1 p.m. Monday.
Reger's contact information follows:
- Matthew Reger, City Prosecutor
City Administrative Services Building
304 N. Church Street
Bowling Green, OH 43402-2399
Telephone: (419) 354-6204
Fax: (419) 352-1262
E-mail: [email protected]
Related news reports:
Editorials:
In upholding the constitutionality of the (now defunct) concealed carry ban in 2003, Resnick and the majority found that the restriction on the right to bear arms for self-defense was necessary because it served "a compelling government interest'' - that of protecting the "public safety."
Ironic, isn't it, that drunk drivers truly DO present a documented threat to public safety, while concealed handgun licenseholders have been proven to be some of the most law-abiding citizens in our society?
- 1629 reads
