997 N.E.2d 414
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Officer observed Gilbert roll through a stop sign and smelled a strong odor of alcohol.
- Gilbert exited the vehicle and stumbled; officer detains Gilbert and calls for DUI specialist Patz.
- Gilbert is transported to a roll call site for further investigation and a 20‑minute observation period commences before a breath test.
- At the roll call site Patz conducts horizontal gaze nystagmus; Gilbert fails; no additional field sobriety tests due to knee issues.
- Patz administers a portable breath test; test is positive; Gilbert consents to a chemical test; charges are filed and later dismissed after suppression order.
- Trial court grants suppression for lack of probable cause; on appeal the State argues there was probable cause to arrest and transport; court reverses, clarifying the distinction between investigatory stops and arrests and addressing a tongue/dentures issue in passing
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause to arrest and transport without field tests | Gilbert argues no probable cause without tests | State contends odor + signs suffice for probable cause | Probable cause existed; arrest lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- Baran v. State, 639 N.E.2d 642 (Ind. 1994) (odor and observed conduct support DWI probable cause)
- Dalton v. State, 773 N.E.2d 332 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (indicia of intoxication support probable cause)
- State v. Johnson, 503 N.E.2d 431 (Ind. Ct. App. 1987) (probable cause concepts apply to seizures and arrests)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (U.S. 2004) (probable cause standard for arrests)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (U.S. 1983) (limitations on investigatory stops; least intrusive means)