NOTICE

Memorandum decisions of this court do not create legal precedent. See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d) and Paragraph 7 of the Guidelines for Publication of Court of Appeals Decisions (Court of Appeals Order No. 3). Accordingly, this memorandum decision may not be cited as binding authority for any proposition of law.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

MANNHEIMER, Judge.

Sheila M. Burke appeals her conviction for driving under the influence.1 Burke contends that the police had insufficient justification for conducting the investigative stop that led to her arrest. As we explain in this opinion, the evidence presented to the district court provides an adequate factual basis for the district court to conclude that the police had adequate justification for the stop. We therefore affirm Burke's conviction.

Underlying facts

When we review the district court's denial of Burke's motion to suppress evidence, we are required to view the evidence presented on this issue in the light most favorable to the district court's decision.2 We therefore present the facts of Burke's case in that light:

At around 6:00 in the morning on May 24, 2008, the Anchorage police received a 911 call from James Phillips, a corrections officer who had just gotten off duty in Anchorage and was driving north on the Glenn Highway, heading home to his Peters Creek residence. Phillips told the 911 dispatcher that he was currently near the Fort Richardson exit, and that there was a suspected drunk driver just behind him.

Phillips said that the driver was a woman, and that this woman was the sole occupant of the car. Phillips also told the dispatcher that the woman looked as if "she'd had a pretty rough night".

Phillips described the woman's car as a blue Nissan Stanza. He told the dispatcher that he could not give the license plate number: he had pulled in front of the woman because he was afraid that she was going to hit him.

Phillips paced the blue car while talking with the 911 dispatcher. He reported that the woman was driving "all over the road — [she] ran off the road a couple of times over to the shoulder. She's on the shoulder again now." Phillips also reported that the woman would slow down, then speed up — that her speed had varied "from forty to sixty [miles per hour]". Phillips told the dispatcher that, at one point, the woman almost hit a semi, and now the driver of the semi would not pass her, apparently out of fear that she would hit his truck.

While Phillips was still on the telephone to the 911 dispatcher, a police officer got into position near the Hiland Drive exit. As Phillips drove past the weigh station located just south of the Hiland Drive exit, he saw the woman taking the Hiland Drive exit, and he could also see the officer "up at the top of the hill".

Phillips told the dispatcher that the woman was "pretty much right behind the officer" — that "if [the officer would] just turn around", he would see her. The very next thing Phillips said to the dispatcher was, "Yep, he's got her." In other words, Phillips saw the officer initiate the traffic stop of the woman.

The 911 dispatcher asked Phillips to also take the Hiland Drive exit, but Phillips had already gone past that exit. The dispatcher then directed Phillips to get off the freeway at the next exit and then circle back to contact the police officer and give a statement.

In the meantime, as Phillips had noted to the 911 dispatcher, Anchorage Police Officer Timothy Masten made a traffic stop of the blue car — which turned out to be driven by Burke.

Masten later testified that there were only two vehicles headed away from the Glenn Highway on Eagle River Loop Road. (When one takes the Hiland Drive exit and heads east on Hiland Drive, the name of the road quickly changes to Eagle River Loop Road.) The first of the vehicles observed by Officer Masten was a grey vehicle that did not match Phillips's description at all; the second vehicle was a blue Acura Integra — not a Nissan Stanza (as Phillips had told the dispatcher), but a blue two-door sedan similar to the one described by Phillips.

Masten stopped this blue vehicle and commenced a DUI investigation. A few minutes later, Phillips arrived on the scene and identified this vehicle as the one he had observed being driven erratically on the Glenn Highway.

Our analysis of Burke's arguments on appeal

On appeal, Burke concedes that Phillips may have had sufficient knowledge to justify an investigative stop of her vehicle, but Burke argues that Officer Masten did not have a reasonable suspicion that the blue vehicle he stopped was, in fact, the same vehicle that Phillips had been observing (and that Phillips had described to the 911 dispatcher).

We disagree. Phillips told the dispatcher that the suspect vehicle had just taken the Hiland Drive exit, and Masten (who was likewise near that exit) testified that there were only two vehicles on the road in that vicinity: a grey vehicle that did not match Phillips's description, and the blue two-door sedan driven by Burke.

True, Phillips described the blue car as a Nissan Stanza, while Burke was actually driving an Acura Integra. But given the time of day (6:00 in the morning), the sparseness of traffic (only two vehicles traveling on that stretch of road), and the fact that Phillips's report was essentially simultaneous with the traffic stop, we conclude that it was reasonable for Masten to stop Burke's car to investigate Phillips's report of a seemingly impaired driver.

The judgement of the district court is AFFIRMED.