244 P.3d 630
Idaho Ct. App.2010Background
- Jacobson was arrested for misdemeanor DUI and given a breath test he failed.
- He was allowed an initial telephone call to a bail bond company, then placed in holding after showing agitation.
- Approximately 1 hour after being held, he was allowed another call after his bail was arranged.
- Jacobson moved to suppress the breath test on due process grounds, claiming denial of access to evidence; magistrate denied; he pled guilty conditional under Rule 11(a)(2).
- District court remanded for findings; transcript delay over 16 months led to a motion to dismiss; district court affirmed magistrate; Jacobson appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was due process violated by jailers denying further calls and delaying access to evidence? | Jacobson | State | No due process violation |
| Did jail policies and booking delays violate due process due to securing exculpatory evidence? | Jacobson | State | No due process violation |
| Was dismissal proper due to transcript delay under ICR 54.7(b) and 48(a)? | Jacobson | State | No abuse of discretion; dismissal denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Carr v. State, 128 Idaho 181, 911 P.2d 774 (Ct.App.1995) (due process requires access to an attorney or testing to preserve exculpatory evidence when DUI arrest)
- Cantrell v. State, 139 Idaho 409, 80 P.3d 345 (Ct.App.2003) (cantrell failed to show access to additional BAC testing; no per se denial of due process)
- Hedges v. State, 143 Idaho 884, 154 P.3d 1074 (Ct.App.2007) (statutory protections require clear, unambiguous request to obtain independent BAC test)
- State v. Rogers, 144 Idaho 738, 170 P.3d 881 (Ct.App.2007) (two-step Mathews due process balancing for liberty interests)
- State v. Smith, 135 Idaho 712, 23 P.3d 786 (Ct.App.2001) (deference to trial court findings of fact when supported by substantial evidence)
- State v. Gallipeau, 128 Idaho 1, 909 P.2d 619 (Ct.App.1994) (prejudice required in due process showing)