State of Iowa v. William Edward Hunt, 16-0068

Trooper stopped William Hunt after multiple 911 calls reported an erratic pickup towing a trailer; trooper observed speeding, fishtailing, driving on shoulder, delayed response, and smelled alcohol.
In the patrol car Hunt showed balance problems, had bloodshot/watery eyes, and failed HGN and one-leg-stand tests; trooper arrested him for OWI and requested a breath sample on a DataMaster DMT.
Hunt provided short, inconsistent breaths; the machine emitted alert tones and the trooper marked the test as a refusal; the DataMaster printout showed poor breath volume but a nonzero alcohol trace.
The State introduced the printout and called a DCI criminalist (Bleskacek) to explain the chart and opine the printout showed alcohol present despite incomplete test; defense did not object at trial.
Hunt testified he had health/breathing problems and claimed he drank a ‘‘chia’’ health drink that might have contained alcohol.
Jury convicted Hunt of OWI; on appeal he claimed (1) admission of the incomplete DataMaster printout prejudiced him and (2) trial counsel should have objected to portions of the prosecutor’s closing argument.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of incomplete DataMaster printout / counsel ineffective for not objecting	State: Expert laid sufficient foundation to show the instrument detected alcohol despite incomplete sample; printout corroborated refusal and presence of alcohol; relevant and not unfairly prejudicial	Hunt: Incomplete test lacks foundation; printout (and unexplained numeric scale) misleads jury and was unduly prejudicial; counsel should have objected	Court: Treated as ineffective-assistance claim (pretrial ruling preliminary). Found adequate foundation for expert opinion; counsel had no duty to make meritless objection; even if error, overwhelming evidence of intoxication prevents prejudice; affirmed.
Prosecutor’s closing argument / counsel ineffective for not objecting	State: Closing fairly argued inferences from evidence (printout showing alcohol trace; defendant’s equivocal testimony about drinking); credibility arguments tied to record	Hunt: Prosecutor misstated record, vouched for officer, and improperly attacked defendant’s credibility; counsel should have objected	Court: Arguments drew legitimate inferences from the record, did not improperly vouch or shift burden; no ineffective assistance shown; affirmed.

State v. Webster, 865 N.W.2d 223 (Iowa 2015) (preservation and scope of review for evidentiary rulings)
State v. Madsen, 813 N.W.2d 714 (Iowa 2012) (Strickland prejudice requires reasonable probability of different result)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
State v. Stratmeier, 672 N.W.2d 817 (Iowa 2003) (admissibility of breath-test results and reliability standard)
State v. Carey, 709 N.W.2d 547 (Iowa 2006) (limits on closing-argument misconduct and permissible inferences)
State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003) (prosecutorial vouching and improper credibility attacks)
State v. Hall, 297 N.W.2d 80 (Iowa 1980) (foundation and cross-examination address weaknesses in expert evidence)
State v. Massick, 511 N.W.2d 384 (Iowa 1994) (refusal to submit to test is admissible evidence)
State v. Smothers, 590 N.W.2d 721 (Iowa 1999) (no duty to advance meritless objections)
State v. Wolfe, 369 N.W.2d 458 (Iowa Ct. App. 1985) (machine readings inadmissible absent proof instrument functioned properly)