Rowell v. State
312 Ga. App. 559
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- Rowell was convicted of DUI and weaving/failure to maintain lane after a traffic stop in Houston County on November 15, 2007.
- Trooper Hardage observed rapid driving, abrupt stop at a red light, crossing the stop bar, and veering into another lane.
- Hardage detected odor of alcohol, red eyes, slurred speech, and Rowell's unsteadiness; she admitted no drinking.
- Rowell failed two field sobriety tests (HGN and one-leg-stand) and tested positive on an alco-sensor reading of 0.208.
- Hardage arrested Rowell for DUI and failure to maintain lane after these observations and tests.
- The state introduced the implied-consent warning, and the trial court denied Rowell’s motion to suppress; conviction occurred after trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the suppression ruling stands given an incomplete ALS transcript | Rowell argues record incomplete; ALS transcript relied on but not in record | State contends burden on Rowell to complete record; record supports denial | Record incompleteness; cannot reverse; record supports denial |
| Admissibility/weight of HGN and one-leg-stand results | Flawed administration renders results unreliable to suppress | Errors go to weight, not admissibility; test results admissible | Tests admissible; weight to be given by fact-finder |
| Coercion/Miranda issue related to alco-sensor testing | Alco-sensor administered without Miranda warning; coercive | Officer’s conduct did not create custodial Miranda-triggering custody | No Miranda warning required under circumstances; any error harmless given independent probable cause evidence |
| Reading of implied consent notice and its preservation | Notice not reflected on videotape; possible non-reading | Record shows reading; gaps due to tape; trial court credibility intact | Hardage read implied consent; waiver or substantial evidence supports admissibility; no reversal |
| Impact of numerical alco-sensor reading on suppression | Numerical reading improperly admitted to bolster probable cause | Even if admitted, harmless error; independent evidence supports probable cause | Admissibility harmless; probable cause supported without the reading; no reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Jupiter v. State, 308 Ga.App. 386 (Ga. App. 2011) (review of suppression using any evidence standard; accepts trial court findings if supported by evidence)
- Crawford v. State, 288 Ga.425 (Ga. 2011) (incomplete appellate record; missing transcript can sustain trial court ruling on suppression)
- State v. Padidham, 310 Ga.App. 839 (Ga. App. 2011) (Miranda considerations for custodial interrogation and chemical testing)
- Leiske v. State, 255 Ga.App. 615 (Ga. App. 2002) (coercion issues re: voluntariness of testing; reading notices and options given to defendant)
- Keenan v. State, 263 Ga. 569 (Ga. 1993) (alco-sensor results are screening, not substantive evidence of BAC; admissibility limited)