State v. Holt
In State v. Holt, Del. CCP, Cr. A. No. 95-06-0120, Trader, J., (Aug. 23, 1995), the Court found that a police officer did not possess the requisite reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop the defendant's vehicle based on violation of this statue.
In Holt, the defendant crossed the line by four to eight inches. The State tries to distinguish Holt from this case by stating the Defendant's vehicle crossed two feet over the shoulder line.
The police officer testified the defendant went over the shoulder by the margin of a tire, or about twenty inches. Judge Trader held that a vehicle barely going over the shoulder line and centerline does not violate the statute.
The defendant crossed the shoulder twice and the centerline once within three-tenths of a mile. In the present case, the defendant crossed the shoulder line three times in a 1.5 to 2 mile distance. The defendant did not cross over the centerline.