State of Delaware v. Nailah Grinnage, 1511000018

On Oct. 31, 2016 (shortly before midnight), Trooper McCloskey responded to a minor parking-lot collision involving Nailah Grinnage outside a bar; McCloskey observed signs consistent with intoxication and the defendant admitted drinking and said she was "drunk."
Trooper McCloskey administered field sobriety tests (alphabet, counting, walk-and-turn, one-leg stand) but did not follow NHTSA standards; the officer arrested Grinnage and transported her to Troop 2.
An observation period before the breath test was recorded using the trooper’s wristwatch (start) and the intoxilyzer’s clock (end); the trooper testified the period lasted 28 minutes but the watch’s accuracy and synchronization with the machine were not established.
The defendant told the trooper she wore retainers; the State disputed whether retainers were in place during testing but did not present that issue to conclusion because of other defects.
The State conceded the PBT results were inadmissible; the court suppressed the scientific portions of the field sobriety tests for noncompliance with NHTSA standards but found probable cause based on totality of circumstances.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Probable cause to arrest for DUI	Probable cause existed based on odor, admissions, appearance, behavior, and field observations	Arrest invalid for lack of probable cause	Court held probable cause existed (based on totality of circumstances)
Admissibility of intoxilyzer given 20-minute observation requirement	Observation was at least 28 minutes (trooper: start on watch, end on intoxilyzer), so requirement met	Observation period not proven because two different timepieces were used and the watch’s accuracy/synchronization was unproven	Suppressed intoxilyzer results; State failed to meet burden due to lack of evidence about watch accuracy/sync and complicating daylight savings timing
Use of multiple clocks to establish observation period	Multiple timepieces acceptable where proven synchronized or where gap clearly exceeds ambiguity	Multiple clocks render the 20-minute showing unreliable absent proof of synchronization/calibration	No categorical ban on multiple clocks, but here multiple clocks without proof of synchronization led to suppression
Effect of retainers on intoxilyzer reliability	State argued no realistic likelihood retainers would alter intoxilyzer result	Retainers can affect reliability and should be considered/removed per guidance	Court did not decide since intoxilyzer already suppressed; issue left unresolved

Clawson v. State, 867 A.2d 187 (Del. 2005) (requires a 20‑minute observation period before administering an intoxilyzer test)