State v. Benson
287 P.3d 927
| Kan. | 2012Background
- Benson was arrested for felony DUI after failing sobriety tests on July 18, 2004 in Shawnee County.
- He had an Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test showing a blood-alcohol concentration of .087, above the .08 limit.
- Because it was his third offense, Benson faced felony DUI charges.
- Benson moved to exclude breath-test results, arguing the certificate of calibration was testimonial and should trigger Crawford v. Washington protections.
- District court ruled the calibration certificate was non-testimonial and thus not subject to Crawford’s Confrontation Clause requirements; Court of Appeals affirmed.
- The issue later addressed on petition for review involved whether his sentence enhancement based on prior convictions complied with constitutional requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the calibration certificate testimonial under Crawford? | Benson argues the certificate was made to aid trial and should be testimonial. | State contends the certificate is a routine maintenance record not tailored to Benson’s trial. | Certificate is not testimonial; Crawford does not apply. |
| May enhanced sentencing based on criminal history violate Apprendi/constitutional rights? | Benson argues prior-history-based enhancement invalid without jury findings. | Ivory permits sentencing based on a criminal history score. | Affirmed: Ivory controls; no constitutional violation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (testimony vs. nontestimonial statements for Confrontation Clause)
- Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (2009) (forensic laboratory certifications are testimonial)
- Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S. Ct. 2705 (2011) (certification with human-action representations is testimonial)
- State v. Ivory, 273 Kan. 44 (2002) (Apprendi-based sentence enhancement analysis retained)
- State v. Leshay, 289 Kan. 546 (2009) (unlimited review for Confrontation Clause issues)
- State v. Noah, 284 Kan. 608 (2007) (Confrontation Clause review standard cited)
- State v. Ransom, 288 Kan. 697 (2009) (Confrontation Clause analysis referenced)
- State v. May, 293 Kan. 858 (2012) (unlimited review in law interpretation)