State Of Washington v. Jason Stymacks, 46136-6

Jason C. Stymacks was arrested for felony driving under the influence (DUI) and given Miranda and implied-consent warnings.
An officer requested a post-arrest breath test and Stymacks refused.
The State charged Stymacks with felony DUI under former RCW provisions.
Before trial, Stymacks moved to suppress evidence of his refusal to submit to the breath test, arguing the test was an unconstitutional, warrantless search.
The trial court granted the motion, excluding evidence of the refusal, concluding refusal is not admissible as evidence of guilt.
The State sought and obtained discretionary appellate review; Stymacks conceded the trial court erred.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence of a post-arrest driver's refusal to submit to a breath test is admissible	The State: refusal is admissible under the search-incident-to-arrest rule established in Baird	Stymacks: refusal should be suppressed as the breath test was an unconstitutional warrantless search	The court reversed the suppression. Under Baird, a post-arrest breath test is a search incident to arrest; refusal is admissible evidence

State v. Baird, 187 Wn.2d 210 (2016) (post-arrest breath test is a search incident to arrest; refusal is admissible evidence of guilt)
State v. Garcia-Salgado, 170 Wn.2d 176 (2010) (warrantless searches are presumptively unconstitutional; State bears burden to show an exception applies)