Cranston v. State
936 N.E.2d 342
Ind. Ct. App.2010Background
- Cranston was arrested for suspected drunk driving after failing field sobriety tests.
- At the county jail, Cranston underwent a certified chemical breath test using a B.A.C. Datamaster with a printed evidence ticket stating his BAC.
- The machine produced two breath samples; the second sample showed a BAC of .15.
- The State introduced the Datamaster evidence ticket and the operator’s foundational testimony, plus an ISO certificate of compliance for the Datamaster.
- Cranston objected to the ticket’s admission on Confrontation Clause grounds, arguing there was no live testimony from a technician.
- The trial court admitted the ticket; Cranston was acquitted of Count I and convicted of Count II for operating with BAC .15 or greater.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confrontation rights and Datamaster tickets | Cranston argues the ticket is testimonial | State contends mechanical data are non-testimonial | Ticket not testimonial; no Crawford violation |
| Whether Datamaster data are hearsay | Cranston asserts hearsay through ticket | Datamaster readings are mechanical data, not hearsay | Datamaster ticket not hearsay; admissible |
| Foundation for admission of breath test results | No live witness to validate test procedure | Operator testimony established proper procedures | Foundation satisfied; admission proper |
| Role of inspection certificate | Certificate of inspection not a Crawford issue | Certificate admissible under Ind. Code § 9-30-6-5(c) | Certificate admissible; not affecting Crawford analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (confrontation required for testimonial statements)
- Napier v. State, 820 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (live testimony needed to challenge breath test results; foundation concern)
- Ramirez v. State, 928 N.E.2d 214 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (datamaster certificates are non-testimonial documents)
- Johnson v. State, 879 N.E.2d 649 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (inspections certificates treated as non-testimonial)
- Luginbyhl v. Commonwealth, 618 S.E.2d 347 (Va. App. 2005) (mechanical data generally not hearsay when properly administered)