STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. RAYMOND C. GRAVATT, JR. (13-01-00146, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-2878-15T1
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 13, 2017Background
- At ~12:11 a.m. on May 7, 2011, Raymond C. Gravatt, Jr. drove a vehicle involved in a serious head-on collision; four people were seriously injured and three were airlifted.
- Police smelled alcohol on Gravatt at the scene; officers concluded probable cause existed for a blood test. Gravatt was flown to Atlantic City Medical Center and was awaiting surgery.
- Little Egg Harbor (LEH) PD was severely understaffed that night; officers were managing traffic detours, medevac landings, and other emergency calls. FAST and other outside units were delayed in responding.
- An LEH officer (McNally) was dispatched with a blood kit (~12:35) to the hospital ~35 minutes away; the blood draw occurred at 2:05 a.m. without a warrant and without Gravatt's consent.
- Gravatt moved to suppress the warrantless blood evidence, arguing McNeely required a warrant absent sufficient exigent circumstances; the trial judge denied suppression, later denied reconsideration after State v. Adkins.
- Gravatt pled guilty to DWI and three counts of assault by auto; he appealed the denial of the suppression and reconsideration motions. The Appellate Division affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether exigent circumstances justified warrantless blood draw after severe crash | State: totality of circumstances (serious injuries, understaffing, delayed outside assistance, dissipation of alcohol) made obtaining a warrant impractical | Gravatt: McNeely bars warrantless blood draws absent a warrant unless exigent circumstances clearly established; police did not seek telephonic warrant | Court: Exigency proven under McNeely/Adkins — totality (serious injuries, understaffing, delayed FAST, no telephonic procedure then, dissipation) made warrant impractical; suppression denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013) (natural dissipation of alcohol is a factor in totality-of-circumstances exigency analysis; no per se exception)
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966) (warrantless blood draw may be reasonable under emergency facts where delay would risk destruction of evidence)
- State v. Adkins, 221 N.J. 300 (2015) (New Jersey must apply McNeely retroactively in pipeline cases and provided guidance for assessing exigency)
- State v. Novembrino, 105 N.J. 95 (1987) (rejection of a blanket good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)