State v. Jasa, 297 Neb. 822

Background

Shortly after midnight on Feb 14, 2015, Lincoln officers were dispatched after Lincoln Fire & Rescue reported a pickup "all over the road." Officers located the pickup and observed it weaving and (per officer testimony) briefly crossing the lane line with the driver-side tires. The officers initiated a traffic stop.
Field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test at the scene led to Jasa’s arrest for DUI. At the county jail, a Class B-permit officer administered an evidentiary breath test showing 0.191 g/210L.
Before the breath test, Officer Morrow observed Jasa for 15 minutes for belching/vomiting and then completed the required checklist (Attachment 16). Officer Sears—identified on the checklist as the permit holder—administered the breath test; both officers were present.
After the test, officers advised Jasa he could arrange independent testing and use the jail telephone; Jasa remained in custody and did not arrange a contemporaneous independent blood test (he later made multiple calls and inquiries without success).
Jasa moved to suppress the breath result, arguing (1) the traffic stop lacked reasonable suspicion/probable cause, (2) the 15-minute observation requirement under title 177 was not properly executed, and (3) § 60-6,199 rights to independent testing were violated. The district court denied suppression; Jasa was convicted and appealed.

Issues

Issue	Jasa's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Legality of traffic stop (reasonable suspicion/probable cause)	LFR tip + officer observations insufficient; no violation of municipal straddle rule	Officer observed weaving and (per testimony) crossing lane line; any traffic violation justifies stop	Stop justified; officer had objective basis (weaving/line crossing) to stop vehicle
15-minute observation under title 177 (foundation for breath test)	Tester (Sears) did not himself observe the full 15 minutes and did not discuss observations with the observing officer, so checklist requirement unmet	Attachment 16 was completed; Morrow (permit holder) personally observed 15 minutes, was present for test, and certified the checklist; title 177 does not require same officer to both observe and administer	Foundation satisfied; checklist tasks were performed and breath test admissible
Scope of compliance: method vs technique (impact on admissibility)	Any noncompliance with title 177 should render test inadmissible	Even imperfect execution affects weight not admissibility once foundational elements proven	Court did not need to resolve method/technique split because foundational requirements were met; admissible
§ 60-6,199 (right to independent testing)	Officers should have done more (transport, assist) because Jasa was in custody and nonbondable; failure prevented exculpatory testing	Officer advised Jasa he could arrange independent testing and allowed telephone access; police have no duty to transport or arrange testing—only must not hamper attempts	No violation. Under State v. Dake, police need not assist beyond permitting calls; suppression not warranted

Key Cases Cited

State v. McCumber, 295 Neb. 941 (two-part review standard for suppression rulings)
State v. McIntyre, 290 Neb. 1021 (statutory/regulatory interpretation reviewed de novo)
State v. Bol, 288 Neb. 144 (Fourth Amendment limits on investigatory stops)
State v. Sanders, 289 Neb. 335 (traffic violation provides probable cause to stop)
State v. Baue, 258 Neb. 968 (four foundational elements for admitting breath test)
State v. Dake, 247 Neb. 579 (police need not transport/arrange independent testing; must not hamper and must allow phones)
State v. Miller, 213 Neb. 274 (noncompliance with technique affects weight/credibility)
State v. Huff, 279 Neb. 68 (appellate affirmation on alternative grounds)
State v. Rodriguez, 288 Neb. 714 (statutory interpretation limits)
State v. Arizola, 295 Neb. 477 (plain-meaning rule for statutes)
State v. Wood, 296 Neb. 738 (do not look beyond plain statutory language)