The North Carolina Court of Appeals has upheld a trial court's decision to deny a motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop involving Shigreggern Siquann Higgs. This ruling, issued on October 21, 2026, is significant for individuals facing similar charges, as it clarifies the standards for reasonable suspicion during traffic stops.
The case arose from an incident on August 25, 2022, when officers from the Edgecombe County Sheriff’s Office stopped Higgs for suspected texting while driving. The court's decision impacts how law enforcement can conduct traffic stops based on observed behavior, specifically regarding the use of mobile phones.
Higgs was initially pulled over after officers observed him holding a phone and moving his thumb in a manner they believed indicated he was texting. During the stop, officers detected the odor of marijuana, leading to a search of his vehicle that uncovered drugs and a firearm. Higgs was charged with multiple offenses, including possession with intent to sell marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon.
Background
The parties involved in this case are the State of North Carolina and Shigreggern Siquann Higgs, the defendant. The dispute centers around whether the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop Higgs' vehicle based on their observations. After being charged, Higgs filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained during the search, arguing that the officers lacked sufficient grounds for the traffic stop.
The case was heard in the Edgecombe County Superior Court, where Judge Seth H. Edwards denied Higgs' motion to suppress on January 31, 2024. Following his conviction on multiple charges, Higgs appealed the decision to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, claiming that the trial court erred in its ruling.
The Ruling
The North Carolina Court of Appeals, led by Judge Christopher Freeman, ruled that the trial court did not err in denying Higgs' motion to suppress. The court found that the officers had reasonable suspicion based on their observations. The court stated, "The findings of fact support that the officers had a reasonable, articulable suspicion of texting while driving."
The court emphasized that the officers observed Higgs holding a phone and moving his thumb in a way that suggested he was texting, which was sufficient to justify the traffic stop. The ruling noted that the officers had a clear line of sight and observed Higgs for a sustained period, which contributed to their reasonable suspicion.
Impact
This ruling has important implications for future traffic stops in North Carolina. It clarifies that officers can act on their observations if they have reasonable suspicion, even if the behavior could have an innocent explanation. The court's decision reinforces the idea that law enforcement does not need absolute certainty to justify a stop, as long as there is a reasonable basis for their suspicion.
The outcome of this case may influence how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly those involving mobile phone use while driving. It sets a precedent that could affect the rights of drivers and the authority of law enforcement during traffic stops.
What's Next
Higgs has the option to appeal the ruling to a higher court if he chooses. However, details regarding any related cases or pending appeals were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case will likely be referenced in future legal arguments concerning reasonable suspicion and traffic stops in North Carolina.