150 A.3d 1093
Vt.2016Background
- On Aug. 8, 2014 a VSP trooper observed defendant drive through a stop sign, drift across center of the road, fail to stop immediately for patrol lights, and drive to his home.
- Trooper approached; smelled alcohol, observed slurred speech and unsteady gait; defendant resisted verbally and was handcuffed and placed in the cruiser without field sobriety or PBT; trooper had ~120 prior DUI arrests.
- At the barracks trooper administered an evidentiary breath test. Trooper told defendant the hospital would require a $75 payment up front for an independent blood draw; defendant declined the hospital option for lack of funds.
- A mental-health/ incapacitation screener evaluated defendant, who refused to answer questions; screener recommended protective custody and defendant was taken to jail, so no independent test was obtained.
- Defendant moved to suppress (1) all evidence as fruit of an arrest without probable cause, and (2) breath-test results because trooper deterred or prevented an independent test. Trial court denied motions; defendant pleaded conditional guilty and appealed. Majority affirms conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for warrantless arrest | Trooper lacked basis to infer intoxication (never met defendant; no PBT or field tests) | Trooper observed traffic violations, failure to stop, odor of alcohol, slurred speech, unsteady gait, and flight to home — experienced officer’s observations support PC | Arrest supported by probable cause; suppression denied |
| Whether trooper deterred defendant from independent test (statutory right) | Trooper’s statements about hospital requiring $75 and futility of going to hospital discouraged exercise of statutory right to independent test | Trooper accurately informed defendant of hospital policy; defendant produced no evidence hospital would not have required payment or waived charge; officer satisfied required advisals | No suppression; victim did not prove officer prevented or misled re: independent test |
| Whether jailing prevented independent test and requires suppression under state constitution | Detention as incapacitated person (jail) deprived defendant of ability to obtain independent test; Rule 3(f) release required for misdemeanors | Detention was under 18 V.S.A. §4808 ICP process; breath test was administered before detention; any alleged unconstitutional detention occurred after breath test | Releasing breath-test results not barred — alleged constitutional violation occurred after breath test so exclusionary rule inapplicable |
| Adequacy of factual findings (clear-error) | Court’s findings (lane failure, unsteadiness, repeated offers to take to hospital, hospital fee as source of interference, motive for custody) were erroneous | Record (dashcam, processing video, testimony) provides reasonable, credible support for findings; credibility determinations for trial court | Findings not clearly erroneous; appellate court defers to trial court credibility determinations |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Webb, 998 A.2d 709 (Vt. 2010) (officer’s statements about cost of independent test do not constitute discouragement absent evidence they were inaccurate or misleading)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (officers may draw on training and experience to make inferences supporting reasonable suspicion and probable cause)
- Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533 (1988) (exclusionary rule bars derivative evidence but requires causal connection; attenuation can dissipate taint)
- State v. Hawkins, 67 A.3d 230 (Vt. 2013) (warrantless arrest requires probable cause under U.S. and Vermont Constitutions)
- State v. Begins, 531 A.2d 595 (Vt. 1987) (officers need not offer PBT or blood test before prosecution; objective symptoms can support DUI prosecution)
- State v. Benoir, 819 A.2d 699 (Vt. 2002) (an independent hospital’s refusal to draw blood does not equate to law-enforcement preventing an additional test)