State v. George Joseph Besaw, Jr.
306 P.3d 219
Idaho Ct. App.2013Background
- Besaw was convicted of misdemeanor DUI with BAC .20+ after an Idaho State Police stop for signaling and lane deviation.
- A breath test on a LifeLoc-FC20 yielded .219 and .201 BAC results; field sobriety tests were administered.
- Besaw moved pretrial to exclude field sobriety and breath test evidence; magistrate allowed limited field sobriety testimony and denied other parts of the motion.
- District court affirmed; Besaw appealed arguing admissibility errors in field sobriety and BAC testing.
- The court addressed admissibility of HGN under Rule 702, other field sobriety tests, and SOPs for breath testing procedures.
- The appellate court affirmed the district court, upholding the breath test results and the admission of field sobriety evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of HGN evidence under Rule 702 | Besaw argues HGN reliability requires Rule 702 hearing and foundation. | Besaw contends reliance on Frye standard; Gleason changed test to Rule 702. | HGN admissible under I.R.E. 702 with proper foundation on tester qualifications. |
| Admissibility of one-leg stand and walk-and-turn tests | These tests require Rule 702 proof due to scientific/technical nature. | Tests are non-scientific; testimony is factual observation not governed by 702. | Admissible as non-Rule 702 factual testimony; not governed by 702 requirements. |
| SOP/Breath-testing standards and reliability | ISP failed to adopt mandatory standards, undermining test reliability under I.C. 18-8004(4). | SOPs are adequate and provide procedures ensuring reliable tests; emails show concerns but do not prove unreliability. | No error; SOPs implicated do not render tests unreliable or inadmissible. |
| Fifteen-minute monitoring requirement | Trooper did not adequately monitor Besaw for 15 minutes due to distractions. | Trooper acted with sufficient proximity and senses; monitoring complied with standard. | Monitoring satisfied; substantial evidence supports adequacy of observation. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Garrett, 119 Idaho 878 (1991) (HGN generally reliable; Frye standard applied to HGN with limits on inference)
- State v. Gleason, 123 Idaho 62 (1992) (Abandoned Frye for Rule 702; HGN reliability governed by 702 with limits)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999) (Daubert extends to technical and other specialized knowledge)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (Daubert standard for scientific evidence admissibility)
- State v. Bell, 115 Idaho 36 (1988) (Uniform procedures; expert testimony not required for BAC results when proper procedures followed)
- State v. Wheeler, 148 Idaho 378 (2010) (Dissent on mandatory vs. nonmandatory standards; informs discussion on SOPs)
- State v. Bennett, 147 Idaho 141 (2009) (Monitoring duration and method to rule out mouth contamination)
- State v. Carson, 133 Idaho 451 (1999) (Monitoring and observational standards for breath tests)
- State v. DeFranco, 143 Idaho 335 (2006) (Observational basis for monitoring during testing)
- In re Hubbard, 152 Idaho 879 (2012) (Treats SOPs/manuals as rules for purposes of review)
- State v. Schroeder, 147 Idaho 476 (2009) (Administrative rule interpretation and evidentiary standards)