Hurt v. State
307 Ga. App. 316
Ga. Ct. App.2010Background
- Hurt was convicted by bench trial of operating a motor vehicle with unlawful blood alcohol level under OCGA § 40-6-391(a)(5).
- Hurt moved to suppress evidence, arguing the police roadblock was illegal and violated the Fourth Amendment.
- Sergeant T.S. Mester, supervisor of the DUI task force, testified he made the roadblock decision for a legitimate primary purpose of DUI detection and approved by his lieutenant.
- Mester also testified the roadblock location, time, and duration were determined by supervisory personnel; he was present only in supervisory capacity.
- Officer J.B. Welchel confirmed department approval and that he assisted in implementing the roadblock under supervision.
- The trial court denied suppression; the appellate court affirmed, holding the roadblock satisfied constitutional standards and that officers were properly trained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the roadblock was implemented by supervisory, programmatic decision for a legitimate purpose | Hurt argues factor 1 not satisfied | Hurt relies on record showing supervisory decision and approved purpose | Yes; decision made by supervisory officers for a legitimate purpose |
| Whether the roadblock stopped all vehicles as required | Hurt contends some cars were not stopped due to congestion | Mester testified all vehicles were stopped or dispersion allowed to reduce congestion as needed | Yes; all vehicles were stopped or exceptions justified to maintain safety |
| Whether officers at the roadblock were sufficiently trained to screen for DUI | Hurt challenges adequacy of screening training | Officers were POST-certified with DUI-detection training; Welchel specialized in DUI | Yes; training was more than sufficient to screen for field sobriety tests |
Key Cases Cited
- LaFontaine v. State, 269 Ga. 251 (1998) (roadblock standard for reasonableness under Fourth Amendment)
- Harwood v. State, 262 Ga. App. 818 (2003) (establishes factors for roadblock validity)
- Brent v. State, 270 Ga. 160 (1998) (agency-level decision and primary purpose considerations)
- Carson v. State, 278 Ga.App. 501 (2006) (analysis of roadblock implementation and flow control)
- Ross v. State, 257 Ga.App. 541 (2002) (traffic flow and safety considerations in roadblocks)
- Wrigley v. State, 248 Ga.App. 387 (2001) (DUI screening training standard)