State v. Deluca
2017 Ohio 1235
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Early morning stop on July 19, 2015; Deputy Hatfield administered three field sobriety tests (HGN, walk-and-turn, one-leg-stand) and cited David Deluca for OVI under R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a).
- Deluca filed a motion to suppress alleging the officer did not follow NHTSA standards; trial court suppressed HGN evidence but denied suppression for the walk-and-turn and one-leg-stand tests.
- At a two-day jury trial Deluca was convicted of OVI, sentenced to 180 days (177 suspended), fined, and received a one-year license suspension.
- On appeal Deluca raised two assignments of error: (1) conviction against the manifest weight of the evidence, and (2) trial court erred by not suppressing the remaining field sobriety test evidence.
- The appellate court reviewed the suppression ruling under the mixed law/fact standard, applied the substantial-compliance test for NHTSA field sobriety protocols, and noted the state’s burden was slight because Deluca’s suppression motion was boilerplate.
- The court affirmed denial of suppression for walk-and-turn and one-leg-stand (officer demonstrated, gave instructions, asked if Deluca understood, and observed multiple NHTSA “clues”); affirmed conviction because appellant failed to provide the trial transcript, so the court presumed regularity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether walk-and-turn and one-leg-stand evidence should be suppressed for noncompliance with NHTSA standards | State: Deputy Hatfield substantially complied with NHTSA standards; demonstrated and instructed Deluca, observed multiple clues | Deluca: Officer testimony inconsistent, omitted report facts, imprecise on arm height, didn’t explain purpose of tests, and stopped one-leg-stand early | Court: Denial of suppression affirmed — state met the slight burden; officer testimony credited; safety-based early termination permitted |
| Whether conviction was against the manifest weight of the evidence | State: Evidence at trial (including admissible FSTs) supported conviction | Deluca: Conviction against manifest weight | Court: Affirmed — appellant failed to provide jury-trial transcript, so court presumes trial proceedings regular |
Key Cases Cited
- Burnside v. Ohio, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (sets standard that appellate review of suppression rulings is a mixed question of law and fact)
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197 (Ohio 1980) (when an appellant omits parts of the record necessary for review, appellate court will presume regularity and affirm)