I have been given the task of identifying and describing a court case. Along with the identification of a court case, I have also been tasked out to determine if the court case supports judicial activism or judicial restraint. I am going to be providing information on the case that is in regards to HEIEN v. NORTH CAROLINA.

On the morning of April 29th, 2009, Sergeant Matt Darisse of the Surry Country Sheriff's Department sat in his patrol car in Dobson, North Carolina. Officer Darisse was observing the northbound traffic on Interstate 77. Briefly before 8:00 a.m., a Ford Escort passed by Darisse. As the car passed, Officer Darisse observed that the driver appeared to be very stiff and nervous looking. As a result of this observation, Officer Darisse pulled out and began to follow the Escort. Some short miles down the road the Escort braked as it approached a slower vehicle, but only the left brake light was working. Noting this information, Darisse activated the lights and preceded to pull the Escort over.

Upon approaching the vehicle, Officer Darisse noted that two men occupied the car. The driver, Maynor Javier Vasquez and Nicholas Brady Heien, who was laying across the rear seat. Sergeant Darisse explained to …show more content…
The state of North Carolina deemed to have displayed judicial activism in regards to the actions taken by the officer during the traffic stop and also during the trial. Supporting facts in regards to this would be the fact that Officer Darisse did not have enough grounds to initiate the traffic stop, the fact that the evidence of cocaine was obtained on personal assumptions of the suspects appearing nervous as the officer indicated, instead of having reasonable doubt, and lastly the fact that the evidence seized during the traffic stop was obtained as a result in violation of the fourth