Request By:
Hon. James S. Secrest, Jr.
Assistant County Attorney
Box 35
Scottsville, Kentucky 42164
Opinion
Opinion By: Steven L. Beshear, Attorney General; James H. Barr, Assistant Attorney General
This is in response to your recent letter in which you question the citation procedure employed by conservation officers for the Department of Fish and Wildlife. You state that when a plain clothes officer observes a fishing violation he radios the description of the violator to another officer in the parking area. The second officer observes the individual to determine the make, model and license number of the vehicle the individual is driving. All of this information is then relayed to a third officer who is parked down the road and who stops the individual and issues a citation charging him with whatever violation has been observed by the first officer.
We find this procedure to be lawful. In KRS 431.015 it is provided that a peace officer may issue a citation instead of making an arrest for a misdemeanor or violation committed in his presence. We believe it can be said the other conservation officers were acting as agents or were assisting the officer who had personally observed the violations. Compare 6A C.J.S., Arrest § 32 where it is stated knowledge of another police officer may be imputed to the arresting officer.
Similarly, see
State v. Barnes, Hi., 568 P.2d 1207 (1977) where it is stated:
"* * * While police officers are acting in concert and are keeping each other informed of the progress of a particular investigation, the knowledge of each is deemed to be the knowledge of all. * * * Personal knowledge on the part of the arresting officer of the facts and circumstances establishing probable cause would not, in those situations, be required to enable him to effect an arrest. "
In
State v. Cook, Kan., 399 P.2d 835 (1965) it was held that a traffic offense was committed in the presence of a highway patrolman who issued the traffic citation. The highway patrolman was in radio contact with two other patrolmen who had clocked the speed of an automobile from an airplane.
Compare
Curry v. Commonwealth, 199 Ky. 90, 250 S.W. 793 (1923) where a sheriff observed a person driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated, was unsuccessful in stopping him, telephoned an officer at a nearby town to detain him until the sheriff arrived, and arrested him without warrant when he did so. It was held the arrest pursuit was immaterial where the continuity was not broken.
Therefore, we conclude the procedure used by the conservation officers was not unlawful.