State v. Hicks
2017 Ohio 7014
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Jessica Hicks was stopped for speeding; officer detected alcohol odor and observed glassy, bloodshot eyes. Hicks admitted drinking about an hour earlier.
- Officer administered standardized field sobriety tests (HGN: 4/6 clues; walk-and-turn: 3/8 clues) and arrested Hicks for OVI.
- At the station, a DataMaster breath test registered .08% BAC. Hicks was charged with speeding and two OVI counts; she moved to suppress the breath test and for lack of probable cause.
- At the suppression hearing, Trooper Walton testified he performed a required instrument check six days before Hicks’s test: RFI check initially aborted then restarted and a solution check produced an in-range result.
- Trooper Ross attempted a post-test calibration the day after Hicks’s test; the machine detected interference and he stopped testing after consulting a supervisor, who took the machine out of service.
- Municipal court denied suppression; Hicks pleaded no contest. On appeal, the Ninth District affirmed, overruling two assignments of error; one judge dissented on the calibration issue.
Issues
| Issue | Hicks' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of DataMaster breath test under OAC 3701-53-04(A) (seven-day calibration) | State failed to substantially comply with calibration rule; post-test problems show machine unreliable | Pre-test calibration six days earlier complied with rule; aborted RFI checks were normal operation and in-range solution result created presumption of admissibility | Affirmed: State met Burnside burden showing substantial compliance; Hicks failed to prove prejudice from any noncompliance |
| Probable cause for arrest for OVI | Observations insufficient to establish probable cause | Odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes, admissions of drinking, poor performance on SFSTs and speeding provided probable cause | Affirmed: Under totality of circumstances officer had probable cause |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (sets burden‑shifting framework for admissibility of alcohol tests under ODH regulations)
- City of Defiance v. Kretz, 60 Ohio St.3d 1 (1991) (admissibility of alcohol concentration tests turns on substantial compliance with ODH regulations)
- State v. Homan, 89 Ohio St.3d 421 (2000) (probable cause for OVI evaluated under totality of circumstances)
- State v. Schmitt, 101 Ohio St.3d 79 (2004) (recognizes statutory or procedural clarifications affecting Homan)