State v. Jasa, 297 Neb. 822

Background

On Feb. 14, 2015, Lincoln officers stopped Jamos M. Jasa's pickup after a dispatch reporting a vehicle "all over the road" and officers observed weaving and (per officer testimony) the driver-side tires cross a lane line.
Officers administered field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test; Jasa was arrested for DUI and taken to the county jail for an evidentiary breath test, which measured .191 BAC.
Officer Morrow observed Jasa for 15 minutes before the breath test; Officer Sears (the permit holder who administered the test) did not personally perform the full observation but was present for the test. Attachment 16 (the checklist) was completed and identified Sears as the permit holder.
After the breath test, Jasa was told he could arrange independent testing and access to a telephone was provided; Jasa made numerous calls from jail over the next 3½ days but did not secure an independent blood test at the jail.
Jasa moved to suppress the breath-test result on grounds the stop lacked reasonable suspicion/probable cause, the 15-minute observation requirement under title 177 was not properly executed, and § 60-6,199 was violated by not facilitating independent testing. The district court denied suppression and the jury convicted; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Jasa)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Legality of traffic stop (reasonable suspicion/probable cause)	LFR tip and officer observations were insufficient; no traffic violation under municipal code	Officers observed weaving and (per testimony) tire crossing; any observed traffic violation supplies probable cause	Stop was justified; district court's factual findings not clearly erroneous and provided objective basis for stop
15-minute observation under title 177 (foundation for breath test)	Sears did not personally observe Jasa for 15 minutes; another officer's observation cannot substitute without communication	Attachment 16 tasks were completed; Morrow (permit holder) personally observed for 15 minutes and completed checklist; title 177 does not require one officer to do every task	Breath-test foundational requirements satisfied; admission of result proper
§ 60-6,199 right to independent testing	Officers should have done more than allow phone access (e.g., assist in arranging or transport) given Jasa was nonbondable	Officers informed Jasa of right, provided phone access, and did not hamper efforts; no statutory duty to transport or arrange testing	No violation of § 60-6,199; following State v. Dake, allowing telephone access suffices; officers did not prevent independent testing
Suppression / Admissibility of breath-test result overall	Cumulative defects required suppression (illegal stop, defective observation, denial of independent test)	Each challenged ground fails; result admissible	Trial court did not err; breath-test result admissible and conviction affirmed

Key Cases Cited

State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941 (standard of review for suppression rulings)
State v. McIntyre, 290 Neb. 1021 (statutory/regulatory interpretation reviewed de novo)
State v. Bol, 288 Neb. 144 (Fourth Amendment principles for stops)
State v. Sanders, 289 Neb. 335 (traffic violation gives probable cause for stop)
State v. Huff, 279 Neb. 68 (appellate affirmance on alternative correct grounds)
State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 (foundational elements for admissibility of breath tests)
State v. Miller, 213 Neb. 274 (distinction between technique and method in testing foundation)
State v. Dake, 247 Neb. 579 (officer need not transport or arrange independent test; must not hamper and should allow phone access)
State v. Rodriguez, 288 Neb. 714 (courts should not read additional duties into statutes)
State v. Arizola, 295 Neb. 477 (plain-meaning statutory interpretation)
State v. Wood, 296 Neb. 738 (do not look beyond plain statutory language)
State v. Dean, 270 Neb. 972 (appellate review limited to issues determined below)