A federal judge last week concluded Fort Collins’ former “DUI officer” had not committed a constitutional violation in arresting a motorist, notwithstanding the officer’s problematic behavior across other cases.

In recent years, several people arrested by Officer Jason Haferman filed suit over their encounters, arguing Haferman wrongly accused motorists of driving under the influence when test results showed no presence of drugs. At one point, the district attorney for Larimer County stopped filing cases in which Haferman was a key witness due to his questionable investigations.

However, in a Sept. 10 order, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Raymond P. Moore concluded Haferman did have probable cause to investigate and arrest Derrick Groves on suspicion of driving under the influence. Even though Groves’ blood test later came back negative for alcohol and drugs, Moore wrote that Groves’ car crash and his behavior while speaking to Haferman suggested impairment.

“Plaintiff has not identified circumstances that should have dispelled Defendant Haferman’s reasonable suspicion that Plaintiff may have been impaired. Thus, the Court finds it was not improper for Defendant Haferman to extend the scope of his investigation into the cause of the accident by investigating whether Plaintiff was driving under the influence and asking him to participate in roadside tests,” wrote Moore.

Because he found no underlying constitutional violation, Moore also terminated the claim against the city of Fort Collins, which Groves had accused of failing to train and supervise Haferman.

Sarah Schielke, an attorney for Groves, said she was “shocked” by Moore’s decision. She believed his reasoning would not apply to the other lawsuits she is pursuing against Haferman and Fort Collins, given the specific facts of Groves’ arrest.

“Judge Moore appears to have relied heavily on the fact of the collision to justify Mr. Groves’ DUI arrest, and none of the other plaintiffs were in any kind of collision,” she said.

Attorneys for Haferman and the city did not respond to a request for comment.

In 2022, KDVR reported Haferman had made roughly one dozen drunk driving arrests in which subsequent testing showed no drugs or alcohol. In one instance, a Larimer County judge acquitted an arrestee of Haferman’s by finding the officer’s testimony “lacks credibility” and was “contrary to the evidence.”

At the end of that year, facing a disciplinary hearing after an internal investigation, Haferman chose to resign. District Attorney Gordon McLaughlin previously raised his own concerns that Haferman’s handling of DUI cases needed to “dramatically improve.”

“I communicated to (Fort Collins police) in August of 2022 that my office would no longer be prosecuting cases in which former Officer Haferman was an essential witness,” McLaughlin said upon Haferman’s departure.

In Groves’ case, Haferman responded in April 2022 to a vehicle accident in which Groves’ Tesla drove off the road and was totaled. The written reports of Haferman and another officer indicated Groves admitted he looked at his cell phone just before going over an embankment.

Haferman believed Groves displayed signs of intoxication. He learned Groves was on probation for a prior impaired driving offense and repeatedly questioned Groves about his drug consumption. Groves denied ingesting anything. Groves initially agreed to perform roadside sobriety tests, but stopped participating at a certain point. He maintained in his lawsuit that it was cold and Haferman had taken his blanket away, which prompted Groves to stop.

Haferman arrested Groves for DUI and careless driving. Groves underwent a blood draw and the results came back negative. McLaughlin’s office dismissed the criminal case, citing Groves’ completion of a responsible driving class.

Groves then sued Haferman for unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution. Documentation submitted to Moore included an internal affairs report that concluded Haferman misunderstood DUI investigation techniques and was overly confident in his field decisions, as well as McLaughlin’s warning that Haferman “demonstrated a significant disregard for the integrity of his investigations.”

Haferman submitted an expert report from a former Sioux Falls police sergeant who acknowledged Haferman incorrectly administered an eye-tracking test on Groves, but concluded Haferman otherwise had probable cause to arrest Groves based on all of the circumstances.

Moore agreed with that conclusion.

He noted the body-worn camera footage did not show Groves’ eyes while Haferman examined them and found them to be “glassy” with different-sized pupils. Moore also acknowledged no one documented any odor of alcohol on Groves at the time.

“But Plaintiff cites no authority, nor is the Court aware of any, for the patently impractical proposition that an officer’s reasonable suspicion of impaired driving may be dispelled based on the driver’s say-so,” he wrote, adding that a reasonable officer could believe Groves’ refusal to participate further in roadside tests suggested guilt.

“As a result, the Court finds that probable cause to arrest Plaintiff for DUI developed when he refused to continue with the roadside tests,” wrote Moore.

Alternatively, Moore found that Haferman had probable cause to arrest Groves for the offense of careless driving.

Schielke, the lawyer for Groves, said she intended to appeal Moore’s decision and refile in state court the claims Groves had raised for violations of his rights under the Colorado Constitution.

The case is Groves v. City of Fort Collins et al.