State v. Boehm
2014 ND 154
| N.D. | 2014Background
- At 12:39 a.m. deputy observed Boehm speeding (44 mph in 25 mph zone) and initiated a traffic stop.
- Deputy smelled alcohol, observed red/watery eyes, and Boehm admitted drinking four beers; Boehm failed HGN but passed alphabet and counting-backwards tests.
- Deputy requested and Boehm submitted to a portable breath test (.114%); deputy arrested Boehm for DUI and later obtained consent for a blood draw at county jail; blood drawn by a registered nurse ~1:05 a.m.
- Boehm moved to suppress blood-test results arguing lack of voluntary consent, that implied consent violates McNeely, and that the blood draw was conducted unreasonably; district court granted suppression reasoning officer lacked probable cause to request the preliminary breath test (court relied heavily on HGN concerns).
- State appealed; Supreme Court reviewed whether officer had statutory authority to request an onsite breath test, whether probable cause supported arrest, and remanded for factual findings on voluntariness of consent and reasonableness of the blood draw.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to request preliminary breath test | Officer met N.D.C.C. §39-20-14(1) requirements (traffic violation + observed signs of alcohol) | Request lacked sufficient basis because HGN unreliable and other sobriety tests were passed | Officer legally could request onsite screening; statutory elements met |
| Probable cause to arrest for DUI | Facts (odor, admission of drinking, red eyes, failed HGN) give probable cause under totality of circumstances | Evidence insufficient—no erratic driving; reliance on HGN improper as sole basis | Probable cause existed to arrest Boehm for DUI under totality-of-circumstances test |
| Voluntariness of consent to blood draw | Consent was given after implied-consent advisory; not per se involuntary | Consent was coerced by implied-consent warning and thus involuntary | Court did not decide on the record; remanded for district court factfinding on voluntariness (consent is question of fact) |
| Reasonableness of blood draw (location/manner) | Blood drawn by a registered nurse at jail is not per se unreasonable | Drawing outside hospital may be unreasonable given circumstances | Court did not decide on the record; remanded for district court factfinding on reasonableness of the draw (question of fact) |
Key Cases Cited
- Moran v. N.D. Dept. of Transp., 543 N.W.2d 767 (N.D. 1996) (establishes two-part test for probable cause to arrest for DUI: signs of impairment and reason to believe impairment caused by alcohol)
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (U.S. 1966) (warrantless blood draws are searches; reasonableness of manner is a factual inquiry)
- Wetsch v. N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 679 N.W.2d 282 (N.D. 2004) (blood draws outside a hospital are not per se unreasonable when performed by medically qualified personnel)
- Kahl v. Dir., N.D. Dep’t of Transp., 567 N.W.2d 197 (N.D. 1997) (odor of alcohol, admission of drinking, and failed FST supported probable cause)
- Brewer v. Ziegler, 743 N.W.2d 391 (N.D. 2007) (red, bloodshot eyes, admission of drinking, and failed HGN supported probable cause)