State v. Burnett
2013 Vt. 113
Vt.2013Background
- Defendant Burnett was stopped in Burlington for speeding and erratic driving around 3 a.m. on December 4, 2011, and arrested after field sobriety tests.
- At the station, Burnett provided an evidentiary breath sample using a DataMaster infrared breath-testing machine.
- The first test produced a “standard out of range” error; after restarting, a usable reading followed (.229).
- A subsequent attempt again produced a “standard out of range” error, and after restarting a second usable reading followed (.260).
- Burnett was charged criminally with DUI under 23 V.S.A. §1201(a)(2) and subject to a civil license suspension under 23 V.S.A. §1205; he moved to suppress in both cases.
- The trial court ultimately upheld the civil suspension and denied suppression in the criminal case; Burnett appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of breath-test results under §1203(d) | State meets standards via affidavit; admissible. | Officer’s failure to follow procedures after error undermines admissibility. | Admissible; suppression denied in criminal case. |
| Effect of following procedures after a fatal error on admissibility | Failure to follow manual procedures renders results inadmissible. | Procedural failures affect reliability, not admissibility. | Procedural deviation goes to weight, not admissibility. |
| Civil suspension presumption of reliability under §1205(h)(1)(D) | Evidence shows test methods were valid and reliable. | Defendant rebutted the presumption with instrument concerns. | Defendant rebutted the presumption; remand to assess reliability. |
| Reliability of the two breath-test results | State can prove reliability via expert and machine history. | Discrepancy and history raise reliability concerns. | Remand to determine reliability; not determinative on admissibility. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Rolfe, 166 Vt. 1 (1996) (admissibility hinges on DOH standards met by instrument at testing time)
- State v. McQuillan, 175 Vt. 173 (2003) (foundational requirements for admissibility of breath tests)
- State v. Spooner, 192 Vt. 465 (2012) (reliability question, not admissibility; presumption can be overcome by evidence of noncompliance)
- State v. Vezina, 177 Vt. 488 (2004) (fatal error test case; handling of errors in admissibility/rule adherence)
- State v. Giard, 178 Vt. 544 (2005) (presumption shifting burden; reliability evidence needed to rebut)
- State v. Anderson, 179 Vt. 43 (2005) (summary civil suspension and presumptions re testing methods)