Garcia v. Levi
2016 ND 174
| N.D. | 2016Background
- At 1:32 a.m., officer responded to a motel dispatch of a silver pickup with no plates "screeching tires." Officer found a running, parked pickup matching the description; Garcia was in the driver’s seat.
- Officer parked several car-lengths away, approached on foot without lights or blocking, and asked Garcia to roll down the window and shut off the engine.
- Officer smelled strong alcohol, observed bloodshot/watery eyes, slurred speech, and saw an open beer bottle in the back seat. Garcia gave his license after first handing a motel key.
- Garcia performed poorly on field sobriety attempts, refused an onsite screening breath test, and was arrested for actual physical control while under the influence and for refusal.
- After arrest and transport, officer read implied consent advisory and requested an Intoxilyzer 8000 breath test; Garcia refused. Department hearing officer revoked Garcia’s driving privileges for 180 days; district court affirmed. Garcia appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer’s initial approach/requests constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure | Garcia: officer "stopped" him by ordering window down and engine off, so a seizure occurred without reasonable suspicion | Levi: officer merely made a consensual approach and requests; no show of authority or coercion | No seizure; officer’s initial approach was a noncoercive contact (alternatively, even if a seizure, reasonable suspicion supported further detention) |
| Whether officer had reasonable and articulable suspicion to detain Garcia | Garcia: no prior observation of illegal activity before commands, so no basis for investigative stop | Levi: dispatch report corroborated by locating the only vehicle matching description, time/location, occupant behavior supported suspicion | Officer had reasonable and articulable suspicion to detain Garcia given corroboration and observations (odor, appearance, open beer) |
| Constitutionality of ND’s test-refusal and implied-consent laws as applied (warrantless breath test) | Garcia: laws violate Fourth Amendment, substantive due process, unconstitutional conditions; penalize withholding consent | Levi: under Birchfield and prior ND precedent, warrantless breath tests incident to arrest are permissible; statute valid as applied | Birchfield controls: warrantless breath tests incident to arrest are permissible; statutes constitutional as applied to post-arrest breath test refusal |
| Department’s jurisdiction / sufficiency of Report and Notice to proceed | Garcia (conceded at oral argument): challenged sufficiency to establish reasonable suspicion | Levi: Report and Notice and corroborating facts supported jurisdiction | Garcia conceded jurisdiction on appeal; Court finds argument without merit and does not disturb Department’s proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Richter v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 786 N.W.2d 716 (N.D. 2010) (distinguishes approach to parked vehicle from stop of moving vehicle; factors for seizure analysis)
- Musselman v. State, 881 N.W.2d 201 (N.D. 2016) (clarifies when contact becomes Terry stop; reasonable-suspicion framework)
- City of Jamestown v. Jerome, 639 N.W.2d 478 (N.D. 2002) (officer’s conversational inquiry at parked vehicle is not a seizure absent show of authority)
- State v. Langseth, 492 N.W.2d 298 (N.D. 1992) (casual officer inquiry contrasted with orders that effect a seizure)
- Mendenhall v. United States, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. 1980) (objective test for whether a person was seized)
- Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (U.S. 2016) (warrantless breath tests incident to arrest for DUI are permissible; warrantless blood tests are not)