State v. Soto

Background

The Soto case concerned combined motions to suppress evidence that the defense claimed had been obtained as a result of selective enforcement of traffic laws by New Jersey State Troopers. Seventeen African American defendants asserted that their arrests on drug charges, which had occurred on the New Jersey Turnpike between 1988 and 1991, were the results of biased enforcement of the traffic laws by the New Jersey State Troopers.

Criminal defense lawyer William H. Buckman, representing Pedro Soto in Gloucester County as well as the 16 other Blacks arrested on drug cases by New Jersey State Troopers on the New Jersey Turnpike, mounted a successful motion to suppress drug evidence seized during a traffic stop.

[Page 769]To set about proving its case, the defense conducted a “windshield survey” by positioning observers on the side of the roadway at randomly selected periods of 75 minutes between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. The purpose was to make an accurate count of the number of vehicles that passed and the race of the occupants of those vehicles. The results of this windshield survey indicated that out of 40,000 New Jersey Turnpike motorists who were observed, 13.5% were Black.

The lawyer for the defense in this case also conducted a survey of the traffic violations issued by New Jersey State Troopers. This survey was conducted 10 times in 4 days between Exits 1 and 3 on the New Jersey Turnpike. The researchers drove their vehicles with the cruise control standardized and set at 55 miles per hour. This setting was 5 miles an hour over the posted speed limit. The researchers observed and documented the number of vehicles that passed their locations, the number of vehicles they passed in traffic, the race/ethnicity of each driver, and whether the driver was speeding. They found that 15% of all drivers in violation were Black; however, Black drivers accounted for more than 46% of all drivers stopped by the New Jersey State Troopers, a discrepancy greater than 3 to 1. The court found in favor of the defendants, holding that they had presented a prima facie case of selective enforcement by the New Jersey State Police. Attorneys for the State of New Jersey were unable to refute the case brought against it.

In a similar study on a section of 1–95 in Florida, which had a reputation as a favorite route for those trafficking in drugs, Blacks and Hispanics made up only 5% of drivers, yet 70% of motorists stopped by members of the Florida Highway Patrol were Black or Hispanic.

...