Dale A. Wells v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
39A01-1705-CR-1119
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- On Dec. 21, 2016 Trooper Garrett stopped Wells after observing a traffic violation and noted signs of intoxication; Wells failed field sobriety tests and took a portable breath test.
- Wells initially agreed to a certified breath test at the jail; the testing machine requires a breath within a three-minute on-screen window.
- During the three-minute period, Wells questioned the trooper, argued that he had already taken a test, and asked about an attorney; the trooper repeatedly directed him to blow but Wells did not provide a usable sample within the time limit.
- The trooper recorded Wells’s noncompliance as a refusal; Wells later requested a hearing under Indiana Code § 9-30-6-10 seeking to invalidate the refusal determination.
- At the hearing, the trooper testified Wells was argumentative and uncooperative during the testing window; Wells testified the conversation was mere chit-chat and that he did not raise counsel concerns until after the period elapsed.
- The trial court found a refusal; on appeal the court reviews denials of such petitions for whether the evidence leads to only one conclusion opposite the trial court’s.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wells refused the certified breath test | State: Wells’ conduct (arguing, not providing a sample within the 3-minute window) manifested unwillingness to submit, amounting to refusal | Wells: He did not refuse; conversation was innocuous and requests for counsel occurred after the time window ended | Court: Affirmed refusal — reasonable officer could conclude Wells was uncooperative and refused |
Key Cases Cited
- Burnell v. State, 56 N.E.3d 1146 (Ind. 2016) (refusal may be established by conduct alone; physical failure to cooperate can equal refusal)
- Hurley v. State, 75 N.E.3d 1074 (Ind. 2017) (officers need not administer a second test to an obviously uncooperative subject; officer discretion to deem a refusal)
- G.G.B.W. v. S.W., 80 N.E.3d 264 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017) (standard of review for appeals from denials of petitions challenging implied-consent refusals)