The Appeals Court of Massachusetts last month confirmed the principle that a police officer has no more power than any other citizen outside of his legal jurisdiction. The decision came in the context of an August 4, 2006 incident where Joseph Limone was driving his Oldsmobile on Montvale Avenue in Woburn just past Interstate 93. Limone rear-ended the car in front of him, which just happened to be driven by a uniformed police officer.
Somerville Police Officer Robert Kelleher just finished his shift and had been returning home. Kelleher got out of the vehicle, and approached Limone who repeatedly apologized. Kelleher ordered Limone out of the car. After noticing that the man appeared drunk, Kelleher pulled the keys out of the ignition so Limone could not drive away. He then told Limone to go back and wait in his car until Woburn police arrived. Minutes later, Woburn Officer David Simonds took over and asked Limone for his license and registration, Limone handed him a pack of cigarettes. Upon arrest, Limone blew a .12 on the breathalyzer and was booked for what would turn out to be his seventh conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). The court of appeal, however, found fault with his initial arrest.
“A police officer’s power to make a warrantless arrest is generally limited to the boundaries of the jurisdiction in which the officer is employed, and, absent fresh pursuit for an arrestable offense, a police officer is generally without authority to make an arrest outside his jurisdiction,” the appellate court ruled. “Outside his jurisdictional boundaries, a police officer stands as a private citizen, and if not in fresh and continued pursuit of a suspect, an arrest by him is valid only if a private citizen would be justified in making the arrest under the same circumstances.”
Because first-offense DUI is a misdemeanor — Kelleher only had reason to suspect Limone of a first offense — a private citizen would have no right to detain an individual for an apparent DUI.
“It was subsequent investigation that disclosed the defendant had been convicted on at least six prior occasions of operating while under the influence of liquor,” the court concluded. “Thus, the seizure of the defendant was unlawful.”
Because the initial arrest was unlawful, the evidence against Limone was thrown out as the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree.’ A copy of the decision is available at the source link below.
Source: Massachusetts v. Limone (Court of Appeals, State of Massachusetts, 6/22/2010)
[Courtesy:Thenewspaper.com]
Way to go Boston! I guess it will take this moron a few more DUI’s to actually kill someone. Maybe then the judge will take notice. Sometimes the law is nothing but a hindrance.
Who says he hasn’t killed anybody. A cousin of my mom was hit by a drunk driver and it killed her baby. The guy was convicted of vehicular manslaughter and sentenced to 3 years. As long as you kill somebody with a car, it’s not considered to be a big deal in the USA.
Don’t blame the law. Blame Officer Kelleher for exceeding his authority.
Why is taking the keys and being told to wait in the car equated with arrest? Does it have something to do with the uniform?
If the drunk had decided to walk away, would he not have been free to?
And if the cop, as a private citizen, “arrested” the drunk by taking the keys, then why was the cop not prosecuted for “unlawful detention” or whatever its legal equivalent is?
Is there no such thing as a “citizen’s arrest”? Then what of all those citizens that piled on the underwear bomber to subdie him?
Maybe there is more in the ruling, but absent that, seems like the system somehow failed here.
Why is taking the keys and being told to wait in the car equated with arrest? Does it have something to do with the uniform?
Yes and no. The acid test we use here in my state is “did the person feel he was free to leave at any time?”
Taking somebody’s keys–by our definition–was an arrest.
Now…in his oath, however, I bet there was some statement about protecting the city in which he serves AND the sate of Mass, etc, etc.
I know in my state…a cop is a cop…your jurisdiction is within the boarders of the state.
Taking somebody’s keys and making them to wait in their car, if you aren’t a police officer making an arrest, is false imprisonment and possibly kidnapping.
While justice isn’t being served by having the DUI-guy back on the road, would you like it if you could be detained or arrested by any out of town or out of state officer?
This is totally OT, but what are the chances that someone is driving a early-mid sixties Valiant or Dart wagon in Boston traffic these days?
(Look to the right of the “undercover” car!)
If you notice, the so-called “UNDERCOVER” car has CA plates…
You may not have heard of them, but “Click and Clack”, two mechanic brothers with degrees from MIT operate a repair shop in Cambridge, MA, and have a radio show. One of them, I can’t remember if it is Ray or Tom, has a Dodge Dart.
@Lumbergh21: It was Tom, and sadly, the Dart was totaled in an accident about ten years ago. I saw it once.
What Kelleher should have done was to get the plate of Limone’s car, called the Woburn or State police on his phone and waited for them to arrive. Outside of Somerville, he’s just another citizen.
The court was right about this. The problem was the Kelleher abused his position outside of his jurisdiction. In order for justice to prevail, we must expect the police to recognize their legal limitations as well as their powers. There must be no excuse for bad policing.
The fact that Limone was a repeat offender is completely beside the point. Kelleher’s poor judgement is the reason that Limone is back on the street.
This wasn’t bad policing…he stopped a drunk from driving on the roads.
He did his job.
He wasn’t doing his job. If he’d found a lawful way to handle the situation, like engaging the drunk moron in conversation and stalled until the local cops showed up, the charge would have stuck and this guy would (hopefully) be off the street.
It’s a stupid system police have to work in, but they SHOULD know how to do so. The alternative is very much -not- doing their jobs.
Why is it only a misdemeanor when you cause an accident while driving under the influence? How is somebody with six DUI convictions out in public least of all driving down the road? Does this have anything to do with it being Massachusetts? If somebody hit my car and tried to leave, I would try to stop them, partiucularly if they appeared to be under the influence of alcohol or a narcotic. Maybe the court ruling was correct according to the laws of Massachusetts, but it still stinks to high heaven. This would seem to be a cut and dry case of protecting the public.
Ironically, if you simply beat the hell out of the guy (or this cop had done so, acting as a private citizen…which was his role at the time), the local cops’ arrest of the drunk would have stuck. But in taking the role of a police officer (a role he was not entitled to in that location), he invalidated everything done by the police after that point.
I’m with you, lumbergh – I’d rather face assault charges and have the guy get his 7th DUI (WHY IS HE STILL ON THE ROADS IF HE’S GOT 6 PREVIOUS) than stand for that.
Lumbergh, there is protecting the public from drunk drivers, and there is protecting the public from abusive police. Now in this case, the policeman was not necessarily abusive, and the driver was decidedly drunk. Going forward,the police now know what they can and can’t do off-duty. If as a private citizen, you see a crime committed, and you can provide perp description or license plate information, or both, there’s nothing stopping you from providing that to police who have jurisdiction. As JuniorMint asked, why is the perp still licensed to drive with six previous convictions. As someone who drives at times in Massachusetts, I’d certainly like to know, and as someone who also drives in the arrest area (metro Boston), it can’t be because the perp pleaded hardship and couldn’t find alternate(public) transportation-there’s plenty of that there, it’s not rural Iowa or Wyoming where you have only your own car or hitchhiking. Also, you would think after the sixth DUI arrest, that the perp would be under a long probationary period with further punishment if caught driving while drunk again. With that, why was the drunk driver still licensed. The court solved the potentially abusive arrest problem, let’s revisit why the perp was still legally on the road.
I believe that cops in general tend to exercise more authority than they legally have. Look at how they’re trying to keep folks from recording them with video cameras and cell phones, as if a public employee doing his job in public has any expectation of privacy at all. Of course, those cases are usually retaliation for recording cops behaving badly.
Regarding jurisdiction, the cops around here ignore it all the time.
I have a pet peeve about cops obstructing traffic when making traffic stops. They say it’s for their own safety, but that makes no sense. You’re far more likely to be hit by traffic if you park halfway into a traffic lane than if you pull over to the side of the road. I think they do it in part just to inconvenience other drivers. If these were chimps we’d call it a dominance display to make it clear to the whole group that they are uber-alpha.
So anyway, I live in a smaller Detroit suburb, and the cops in the adjacent suburbs will sometimes, when ticketing someone for allegedly driving improperly on a border road, pull them over onto a side street in my city.
In one case, a cop from a neighboring jurisdiction had someone pulled over on a boulevarded residential street, with the civilian at the curb, and the cop’s cruiser completely blocking the remaining traffic lane. I was walking by and when I saw a tradesman in a pickup truck drive up onto the berm to drive around the cop, I suggested to the cop that him making a traffic stop doesn’t give him the right to block traffic outside his jurisdiction. He sarcastically said “thank you”, but never moved his car.
At least he feigned politeness. Often critiques of cop behavior are met with threats.
On another occasion, I was driving up a major road and turned onto a side street. That street is the only entrance to that subdivision and yet another sub from that main road so there’s a lot of traffic on it. It’s also only one house wide at that point, and there’s a side street intersection immediately adjacent. So there’s a ton of traffic right on that short little segment, in both directions.
When I pulled off the main road, I almost rear ended a cop from an adjacent municipality. He was parked in the traffic lane, about 20′ from the main road. The one house on that black happens to belong to my cousin, who gets annoyed by the fact that if he parks his own car in front of his driveway, he’ll get ticketed, but cops from both our city and the adjacent one routinely block his drive when they make traffic stops. If he has to take his truck to a job (he’s a plumber) they tell him to wait.
I pulled around the cruiser that was blocking my path, and parked at the curb, just up the block.
Me: “Excuse me, officer, but you’re parked very unsafely. I almost rear ended you. People coming off of Greenfield don’t expect to find a car parked in the traffic lane.”
LEO: “Kiss my ass!”
Me: “What did you say to me?”
LEO: “Kiss my ass. Leave or I’ll arrest you for interfering with a police stop.”
Me: “Go to hell. You’re out of your jurisdiction. You’re in my city, not yours. I’m not breaking any laws of Oak Park or Michigan, just standing on the sidewalk of my own city, offering my opinion. What’s your badge number?”
LEO: Glowering silence.
Me: “Fine. You’re driving cruiser #69. You can expect a lecture when you get back to the shop.”
Though the duty office had no problem with obstructing traffic (no cop will ever acknowledge to a civilian that any police policy is wrong), he wasn’t happy with the officer’s language.
Cops are just a particularly odious form of public employee that can take away your liberty and your property. The DMV workers may be lazy, overpaid and entitled, as cops also are, but cops can mess up your life simply for the “crime” of giving a cop attitude.
I don’t believe in being deferential to public employees. It’s their job to be deferential to me.
If you really want to piss off a cop, tell him that he works for you. If you want to rub it in, tell him that garbagemen have more dangerous jobs than cops do.
It’s unfortunate that Officer Kelleher’s zeal to exercise authority (and his anger at getting rear ended, no doubt) led him to take actions that ultimately let a guilty man go free. This is one reason why we want cops to follow the law. I’m sure that badge bunnies and the boys in blue will say this guy got off on a technicality, but Limone got off because of Kelleher’s mistakes.
I believe that cops in general tend to exercise more authority than they legally have…..
I’m in totally agreement with that statement . I live in a small town in Southern In( population under 500) that pissed off the Indiana State police so bad they set out to make an example out of us .
We employ a town marshall who’s hardest job here is to get the stray cow off the highway that got out of the fence or find the local boy that stole a pack of cigarettes from the small grocery store in town . Just to give you a example of what a rowdy town we are . lol
Every yr our town holds a picnic that is mainly put on by our park board and volunteer fire dept .Barbecue and chicken dinners , raffles , games and a local band plays that evening . The money raised is split between the two for much needed manintenace and equipment . Well 2 yrs ago they decided to add a beer garden . Other surrounding towns always have them( without any problem ) and they bring in quite a bit of money also .
Well ours started off at 5:00 that evening with the arrival of 9 state police cars with a bunch of new recurits as passenger in each of the cars . They lined their cars up in the parks parking lot where you went into the beer garden and stood as a group in front of it . As the evening went on half of them ended up in the beer garden walking around . By this time the fire dept boys were getting pissed off . They work long and hard to pull off these picnics and meals . The fire cheif asked the state boys to please move their cars ,as it was very intimidating for anyone wanting to even pull into the lot . They refused , more fire dept members got involved as did the local tavern owner whos busniness they killed that night . A pretty heated arugument evolved with nothing being solved but badge numbers being wrote down and the state boys treatening to shut it down .
That following Monday our fire cheif went to our county police dept and complained about the actions of the state police . He was told there was nothing they could do because it was state .
Two weekends later on a quiet Saturday evening they were back . This time 6 state boys 2 unmarked cars . They were figgin everywhere ! Said they were going to make an example off us . They drove up and down the steets around everyblock . Were on the end coming into town and the end going out .Stoping anything they could . To loud , no seatbelt , to much tint , bulb burnt out by license plate , basically anything . But their biggest hard on was for the fire dept , if you had a blue light on top of your vehicle or any sign what so every you were fire dept , you were stoped . This went on for over 2 hrs !
Went they left out of town they formed a line one right after another and made one last drive through a town that doesn’t even have a stop light .
We got the point ……don’t piss off the cops !They basically can do what they want .
Please excuse any typos in my rant about the police . Typed it pretty quickly .
I believe that in a non-injury accident, where both vehicles are operational, in MA all that is required is an exchange of information, and both parties are free to go. The off-duty officer had no right to forcibly detain the other driver. He can take the license plate # down, request name, address insurance co. etc. and call the local police. If the driver flees…it becomes a more serious hit and run.
I don’t believe there are any U.S. states where a municipal police officer has jurisdiction outside his town/city (except fresh pursuit, court orders, observing a felony and other exceptions that vary). A county Sheriff has county-wide jurisdiction, and state police/troopers are state-wide.
In California, ALL CA LEOs have statewide jurisdiction.
Unfortunately the judges don’t have the option to throw both parties in jail.
It’s too bad this douchebag got away with it, but we do have to protect the Constitution. Now with 6 priors, the real issue is what the hell is he doing on the road? He could go out and kill someone now, or he could have done it after conviction #1…….or 2…..
I believe that cops in general tend to exercise more authority than they legally have………
Ronnie, that’s an excellent illustration of the frustration people have when dealing with some police officers. Of course they are human like the rest of us but they frequently forget that they are public servants. ‘To Serve and Protect’ can sometimes be hard to believe.
I guess this varies by state. I believe that California’s laws generally empower a police officer to exercise their full scope of authority anywhere in the state.
For once, a decision limiting the power of the police. Now if we could only make it legal to photograph officers, in public places, performing their public duties.
Its good to see this. Cops need to be put in their place and remember that they are here to serve us, not the other way around.
For every time someone says ‘cops protect us, they have a dangerous life threatening job blah blah’, there are 100’s of incidents where they blatantly and illegally abuse the authority. Its very rare to find an honest cop these days.
In Canada, all police officers are Canadian police, regardless of where they are employed. An Ottawa officer can legally arrest someone in Vancouver, and vice versa.
This doesn’t make sense to me. It’s totally fine about jurisdiction ending at the town line in Mass. What’s confusing to me is that after the 5th DUI conviction in Mass, the drivers license is revoked permanently. That is after the mandatory minimum prison term for each felony conviction (3rd = 150 days, 4th = 1 year, 5th = 2 years) the person is not allowed to drive again, no hardship license allowed.
It would be hard to exchange information with the other party when they have no driver’s license or insurance. None of this is mentioned in the above article and linked case brief.
What’s confusing to me is that the officer didn’t relay the plate number in his initial phone call to the Woburn PD. There’s some good information that could have been passed on. Registered gun owner? History of violent felonies? The usual info that a police officer would want at any traffic stop. That information (if linked with that vehicle) would have given the Somerville officer the information that it was a felony DUI stop.
I’m sure every force in MA is now re-writing their procedures because of this one.
I’ll reiterate my point which was missed. I guess I wasn’t clear enough, but why would any DUI, particularly one involving an accident, not be a felony!? I don’t care if it’s his first, fifth, or 100th. DUI, particularly when there is an accident, should be a felony. Evidently, if the cop had reason to believe that a felony had been committed, he would have had the right to detain the drunken SOB.
He’d still be out of his jurisdiction and could only legally detain the driver if that state’s laws permit citizen arrests for the same crime. Outside of his department’s jurisdiction, he’s not a cop.
I have to agree with Ronnie here, a badge isn’t a universal license to detain someone. The police have clear rules defining what they can do, and when and where they can do it. When they violate those rules they should be held accountable just as civilians are when they break the law.
The officer in question used poor judgment, and the court made the right decision not to condone the behavior or set a precedent where the actions could be repeated, perhaps even in future situations where the lines of what should have been done weren’t so blurred. Had the suspect driven off, all the officer would have had to do was taken down his license plate number, and he would have had him on a hit and run, which combined with the fact that the guy had six prior DUIs and couldn’t possibly have had a valid license, would have been enough to put him behind bars for a while.
Why a DUI, even just one, is not punished as a felony? Mainly, that’s up to your state legislature. Felony, by most state definitions, involves a jail sentence on one year or more, if given the maximum term. That doesn’t just mean you lose your license for a year, that means you spend a whole year(or more) in jail, which in most cases means you lose your job and you have a felony conviction on your record. THAT means your chances of getting a job after you’re released are diminished. DUI is a very serious crime, but a lot of politicians, for the above reasons, are resistant to making first offense DUI a felony. Obviously if a serious accident or death were to be involved, other crimes would be charged, and felony penalties would kick in at that time.