Farhat v. State
337 S.W.3d 302
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Farhat was convicted of a Class B misdemeanor DWI and appealed, challenging the denial of his suppression motion for blood-evidence obtained under a warrant.
- Corporal Finley observed Farhat weaving, slow speed, and lane behavior, followed him, and stopped him in a KFC parking lot.
- Two pill bottles were found in Farhat's center console; Farhat refused to perform roadside sobriety tests and was arrested.
- A sworn affidavit supported a blood-draw warrant; the magistrate signed the warrant.
- At trial, Farhat moved to suppress the blood evidence; the court denied the motion and Farhat was sentenced.
- The court of appeals reversed and remanded, holding the affidavit failed to establish probable cause for the blood warrant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the affidavit established probable cause for the blood warrant | Farhat | State | No substantial basis for probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Flores v. State, 319 S.W.3d 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (probable cause under totality of circumstances)
- Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable-cause standard requires totality of the circumstances)
- Rodriguez v. State, 232 S.W.3d 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (deference to magistrate's probable-cause determination; reasonable inferences allowed)
- Swearingen v. State, 143 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (totality-of-circumstances test for search warrants)
- Tolentino v. State, 638 S.W.2d 499 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (affidavit must provide facts, not bare conclusions)
- Beeman v. State, 86 S.W.3d 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (blood-draw warrants in DWI investigations)