Many people wrongly believe that a law enforcement officer must have probable cause to believe that a defendant has committed a traffic infraction or have a reasonable suspicion to believe that the defendant has committed a crime in order to lawfully stop a vehicle. As recently recognized by Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeals in State v. Sheldon, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D 2034a (Fla. 5th DCA October 8, 2024), however, a traffic stop may also be legally initiated under the “community caretaking doctrine,” an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.
In Sheldon, the defendant was observed weaving over a fog line several times. He was stopped by the arresting officer to conduct a “welfare check” because the officer was “concerned the driver was ill, impaired, sleepy, or having mechanical issues.” In ruling that the stop was permissible as a “welfare check” the court concluded that under the caretaking doctrine, the stop was valid.
Sheldon is far from the only case to apply this exception to the warrant requirement in this context. This exception was first recognized by the court in DMV v. DeShong, 603 So. 1349 (Fla. 2d. DCA 1992), where the court held first, that founded suspicion, not probable cause, is the standard for deciding whether a traffic stop is lawful. More importantly, it also held, “Driving behavior need not reach the level of a traffic violation in order to justify a DUI stop.” Using this rationale, the courts have permitted stops where the officer observes driving that does not constitute a traffic violation, but nonetheless leads the officer to conduct a welfare check on the driver.
When faced with an arrest after you have been stopped under the guise of a welfare check, contact our firm. We have decades of experience litigating criminal driving offenses, particularly driving while intoxicated, and challenging the lawfulness of traffic stops.