State v. Jerome Joseph State v. Voguel Figaro

Syllabus

The state appealed from two Superior Court orders granting motions to suppress filed by the defendants, Jerome Joseph and Voguel Figaro. On appeal, the state argued that the hearing justice erred because: (1) the state police had reasonable suspicion to support detaining the defendants and allowing a police dog to perform a narcotics sniff, and (2) no evidence of racial bias existed. <br><br>The Supreme Court concluded that the hearing justice improperly interjected the issue of racial bias sua sponte. The Supreme Court, however, held that the hearing justice's decision was otherwise amply supported by the evidence adduced at the suppression hearing and, ultimately, that the state police did not have reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to support detaining the defendants beyond completion of the traffic infraction investigation. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the Superior Court. <br>