State v. Decker
267 P.3d 729
Idaho Ct. App.2011Background
- Decker, a DUI defendant, was involved in a Blaine County accident and transported to a hospital where she showed signs of intoxication.
- Deputy Turner smelled alcohol, observed wine bottles, and noted Decker admitted to drinking six glasses of wine.
- Turner requested a BAC test but failed to give the full Suspension Advisory Form and did not inform Decker of independent testing rights or civil consequences of refusal.
- Decker signed a BAC test consent; her BAC was .33, leading to a DUI charge under I.C. § 18-8004C(1) (excessive alcohol).
- Decker moved to suppress the BAC results; the magistrate denied, the district court affirmed, and Decker appeals challenging both statutory and due process grounds.
- The issue on appeal is whether the officer’s failure to advise about independent testing requires suppression in a criminal prosecution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Statutory suppression viability | Decker argues failure to advise triggers suppression per 18-8002/18-8002A | State contends failure affects only administrative suspension, not criminal suppression | No suppression for criminal case based on advisory failure |
| Constitutional due process impact | Failure to follow advisories and misinformation violates due process | No due process rights violated by advisory failure | Due process claim rejected |
| Scope of remedy for advisory failure | Advisory failure constitutes denial of independent testing rights | Statutory remedies pertain to administrative suspension, not criminal evidence suppression | Statutory remedies do not require suppression in criminal case |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Woolery, 116 Idaho 368, 775 P.2d 1210 (Idaho Ct.App. 1989) (failure to inform warnings does not suppress in criminal prosecutions)
- State v. DeWitt, 145 Idaho 709, 184 P.3d 215 (Ct.App. 2008) (advisory failures relate to administrative suspension, not criminal suppression)
- State v. Harmon, 131 Idaho 80, 952 P.2d 402 (Ct.App. 1998) (regarding admissibility and advisory requirements in DUI context)
- State v. Atkinson, 128 Idaho 559, 916 P.2d 1284 (Ct.App. 1996) (standard of review for suppression motions)