Nagata v. State
319 Ga. App. 513
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Nagata was convicted of two counts of DUI and of failure to maintain lane.
- On appeal, Nagata argued the implied consent notice did not designate a specific tested substance, making breath test results inadmissible.
- The court reviews the trial court’s law to undisputed facts de novo.
- The stop occurred December 12, 2009 after Nagata’s vehicle failed to stay in its lane; officer observed seat belt violation, strong odor of alcohol, and red watery eyes.
- Nagata admitted drinking; he was arrested after field sobriety testing; officer read an implied consent notice and Nagata consented to a breath test; Nagata challenged the designation language under OCGA § 40-5-67.1(b)(2); the court held the notice was substantively accurate and permitted informed consent.
- The court affirmed the denial of Nagata’s motion to exclude the breath test results.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether implied consent notice must designate a specific test | Nagata argues notice failed to designate test(s). | State contends designation is not needed; notice sufficient. | Notice was substantively accurate; designation not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Collins v. State, 290 Ga. App. 418, 420 (1) (659 SE2d 818) (2008) (Ga. App. 2008) (notice sufficient when officer asks about state-administered tests rather than a specific bodily substance)
- Colon v. State, 256 Ga. App. 505, 507 (2) (568 SE2d 811) (2002) (Ga. App. 2002) (no exclusion for minor variance in implied consent warning)
- State v. Brantley, 263 Ga. App. 209, 211 (587 SE2d 383) (2003) (Ga. App. 2003) (court addressed implied consent wording as non-dispositive)
- Padidham v. State, 291 Ga. 99 (728 SE2d 175) (2012) (Ga. 2012) (affirms related procedural context on implied consent)
- Padidham, 310 Ga. App. 839, 842 (1) (714 SE2d 657) (2011), 310 Ga. App. 839 (Ga. App. 2011) (discusses punctuation/notice related to implied consent)
- State v. Chun, 265 Ga. App. 530, 531-532 (594 SE2d 732) (2004) (Ga. App. 2004) (no misleading statements to render testing decision invalid)