2020 Ohio 4485
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- On Feb. 12, 2019, Chase Boles struck a parked vehicle while attempting to leave a bar; Deputies Beach and Baker witnessed/heard the incident.
- Dep. Beach smelled alcohol on Boles, observed slurred speech and glassy, bloodshot eyes, took Boles’s ID and keys, and called Dep. Fizer for OVI assistance.
- Dep. Fizer (experienced OVI specialist) arrived, also smelled alcohol, observed staggered gait and slurred speech, and administered HGN, vertical nystagmus, walk‑and‑turn, and one‑legged‑stand tests that he said showed high impairment.
- No cruiser video of the field sobriety tests was recorded (officer believed it was), Boles refused a breath test, and Fizer arrested Boles for OVI but did not take him into custody.
- Boles moved to suppress all evidence, arguing lack of probable cause, noncompliance with NHTSA field‑sobriety standards, and involuntary statements; the municipal court granted suppression.
- The State appealed, arguing (1) the officer established substantial compliance with NHTSA so the FST results are admissible, and (2) the totality of circumstances provided probable cause to arrest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Boles) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of field sobriety test (substantial compliance with NHTSA) | Fizer testified he administered tests per NHTSA; defense raised only a general challenge, so State met its burden | Tests failed NHTSA compliance; lack of video and alleged procedural omissions undermined results | Reversed: State met burden because defendant’s challenge was general, Fizer testified to NHTSA compliance; absent bad faith, lack of video affects weight not admissibility |
| Probable cause to arrest for OVI | Totality (collision, strong odor, slurred speech, glassy eyes, staggered gait, admissions of drinking, bartender corroboration) established probable cause even without FST results | Trial court cited inconsistencies/gaps; argued evidence insufficient for probable cause | Reversed: Totality of the circumstances provided a reasonably prudent person basis to arrest for OVI |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App.3d 586 (2d Dist. 1994) (trial court factual findings entitled to deference on suppression).
- State v. Boczar, 113 Ohio St.3d 148 (Ohio 2007) (foundation requirements for admitting field sobriety test results).
- State v. Codeluppi, 139 Ohio St.3d 165 (Ohio 2014) (video is primary evidence of FSTs but absence does not make results inadmissible).
- State v. Homan, 89 Ohio St.3d 421 (Ohio 2000) (probable cause may be found from totality of circumstances absent test results).
- State v. Hopfer, 112 Ohio App.3d 521 (2d Dist. 1996) (standard of review for suppression rulings).