State v. Edgar, 294 P.3d 251

Edgar challenged suppression of PBT results and DUI arrest after field sobriety tests.
Officer initially stopped Edgar for license check; aromatic odor of alcohol and admission to drinking observed.
Edgar performed three field sobriety tests (HGN, walk-and-turn, one-leg stand) with mixed results.
A preliminary breath test (PBT) was administered after officer told Edgar he had no right to refuse; PBT read .122 BAC.
District court denied suppression; Court of Appeals affirmed on notice issue but remanded on reasoning; Kansas Supreme Court reversed on both issues and remanded."
Edgar argues the initial suspicion dissipated after passing sobriety tests and that the officer’s incorrect notice to refuse invalidated consent to the PBT; the State contends suspicion persisted and consent was implied by statute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether success on field tests dispels reasonable suspicion to request a PBT	Edgar asserts suspicion dissipated after tests	State argues totality allows PBT regardless of post-test results	Yes; must consider totality including field tests; passing tests does not automatically negate suspicion
Whether officer’s incorrect PBT notice rendered consent involuntary	Edgar contests misstatement vitiating consent	State argues notice failure not defense; implied consent controls	Yes; misstatement rendered PBT involuntary and violated consent; suppress PBT and arrest/rules accordingly

Pollman v. State, 286 Kan. 881 (1998) (reasonable suspicion assessed by totality of circumstances)
Tollman v. State, 286 Kan. 881 (2008) (odor of alcohol and admission can create suspicion for DUI investigation)
Mara v. State, 186 Vt. 389 (2009) (PBTs permissible after odor/admission despite prior tests)
Shrader v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 296 Kan. 3 (2012) (probable cause/limits on breath testing and arrests)
Sloop v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 296 Kan. 13 (2012) (limits of breath test requests and testing procedures)