169 A.3d 399
Me.2017Background
- On Nov. 17, 2015, Officer Gregory Caldwell observed John T. Simons speed (≈42 mph in a 25 mph zone) after leaving a bar; Caldwell initiated a traffic stop.
- Caldwell smelled mints initially, saw a container of mints, and later smelled alcohol from Simons’s vehicle and breath; Simons admitted drinking earlier and said he stopped at 5:00 p.m.
- Caldwell observed shaky hands, stumbling when exiting the car, and administered three field sobriety tests (HGN, walk-and-turn, one-leg stand), noting multiple clues of impairment; Simons was arrested.
- Simons moved to suppress evidence from the stop and to exclude HGN testimony because the officer was not certified "proficient"; the court denied suppression and admitted HGN evidence.
- After a jury trial, Simons was convicted of operating under the influence (enhanced offense); he appealed challenging suppression, HGN admissibility, sufficiency of evidence, and juror impartiality.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Simons) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether officer had reasonable articulable suspicion to require exit and FSTs | Stop for speeding justified initial stop; officer developed reasonable suspicion from odor, admission of drinking, and observed signs to ask for FSTs | Caldwell lacked adequate observable indicia of impairment when he asked Simons to exit; suppression required | Court: Denial of suppression affirmed — combined facts gave objectively reasonable articulable suspicion |
| 2. Admissibility of HGN testimony | Caldwell was trained at Maine Criminal Justice Academy and properly administered the HGN; foundation satisfied | HGN testimony should be excluded because officer was not certified "proficient," so foundation inadequate | Court: Admissible — training and testimony on administration satisfied Taylor foundation; proficiency affects weight, not admissibility |
| 3. Sufficiency of evidence for OUI conviction | Testimony of speed, admission of drinking, odor of alcohol, physical observations, and poor FST performance supported conviction | Evidence was insufficient to prove impairment beyond reasonable doubt | Court: Evidence sufficient — jury could rationally find impairment beyond a reasonable doubt |
| 4. Juror impartiality (Questionnaire Q14) | Court’s individual colloquies rehabilitated jurors; impaneled jurors assured ability to follow law | Question 14 misconstrued law and some jurors’ initial answers showed bias; those jurors should have been excused | Court: No obvious error — voir dire and individual follow-up sufficed; court warns Q14 was a poor phrasing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hinkel, 159 A.3d 854 (Me. 2017) (recent Maine precedent on HGN foundation and admissibility)
- State v. Taylor, 694 A.2d 907 (Me. 1997) (establishes two-part foundation for HGN: officer training and proper administration)
- State v. Wood, 662 A.2d 919 (Me. 1995) (field sobriety tests and investigatory stop require specific articulable suspicion)
- State v. King, 965 A.2d 52 (Me. 2009) (standard of review for factual findings supporting suspicion)
- State v. Atkins, 129 A.3d 952 (Me. 2015) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in OUI convictions)