Court upholds Clovis officer's questioning

Aug. 19—The Supreme Court of New Mexico has unanimously upheld a Clovis police officer's questioning of a non-driver passenger in a vehicle pulled over on a traffic stop, according to a news release from the New Mexico Administrative Office of the Courts.

The Supreme Court upheld Clovis Police Officer Brice Stacy's questioning of the passenger, Hugo Vasquez-Salas, ruling that Stacy had "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity to authorize further questioning, the news release stated.

Vasques-Salas had asked the court to throw out evidence that Stacy had gathered from questioning him, because, he said, it violated Vasquez-Salas' right against illegal search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, since Vasquez-Salas' questioning was not related to the reason for Brice's traffic stop.

The evidence was used to convict Vasquez-Salas in a 2018 misdemeanor case in which he was charged with possession of burglary tools.

The court's ruling upholding Stacy "further clarified the scope in which law enforcement officers can further their investigation by asking for the name and date of birth of a passenger in a vehicle in a traffic stop," the news release stated.

According to the AOC's release, the Supreme Court concluded on Monday that Stacy's questioning of Vasquez-Salas was authorized because Stacy had "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity when he asked for the proper identity of the front seat passenger in a traffic stop. The release also stated that the questioning of Vasquez-Salas was permissible under federal and state constitutional provisions.

Lauren Rodriguez, director of communications for the New Mexico Office of the Attorney General, wrote in an email, "We agree with the Supreme Court opinion ... in the State of New Mexico v. Hugo Vasquez-Salas case, affirming the district court's denial of the defendant's motion to suppress."

The attorney general's office prosecuted the case before the Supreme Court.

Further, Rodriguez wrote, "The opinion points to established authority that supports the court's conclusion that the officer's actions were 'constitutionally reasonable' when he asked for the defendant's identifiers. The basis of our argument during the appeal process encompassed this theory and also explained that the officer's reasonable suspicion developed throughout the stop."

A jury convicted Vasquez-Salas of possession of burglary tools in 2018, according to the release. He appealed his conviction, stating there was a lack of constitutional justification when the police asked about his identity.

The court had rejected these arguments, the release stated.

Matthew Edge, the assistant appellate public defender attorney who defended Vasquez-Salas before the Supreme Court, disagreed with prosecutors.

"By granting police broader authority, the Court has overturned two decades of New Mexico's privacy protections based on federal law," Edge said. "The New Mexico Constitution should still protect the privacy of passengers in a stopped car, but that protection is now thrown into doubt if police can use innocuous details to justify invading people's protected privacy."

The release states that Stacy stopped the vehicle Vasquez-Salas was riding in due to a broken license plate light. As Stacy approached the stopped vehicle, he witnessed an open backpack in the backseat of the vehicle. Visible within the backpack were bolt cutters, gloves and a face covering.

Stacy determined the driver of the vehicle was an unlicensed minor and asked Vasquez-Salas, the passenger, if he possessed a driver's license. Vasquez-Salas responded that he did not possess one, according to the release.

Stacy then asked for Vasquez-Salas' first and last name, along with his date of birth, and Vasquez-Salas provided false information, the release stated.

Vasquez-Salas argued that Stacy's suspicion of the burglary tools within the backpack did not authorize Stacy to investigate that offense further, during a stop based on a traffic offense, by asking for Vasquez-Salas' identity.

The release states that Vasquez-Salas said that the tools in the backpack are used commonly and legally in many professions.

Based on the Supreme Court opinion by Justice Julie Vargus, the release states, the court supported Stacy's investigation due to several factors, including:

— Vasquez-Salas' and the driver's "nervous and unusual behavior" during the traffic stop.

— Vasquez-Salas' providing "false identifying information" when being questioned.

— Stacy's experience with several burglaries.

The justices did not base their decision on Vasquez-Salas' proximity to or possession of lawful items, according to the release.