State v. Kruse, 931 N.W.2d 148

On Aug. 31, 2017, Seward police responded to an injury motor-vehicle crash and found Steven C. Kruse slumped in the driver’s seat; he was transported for medical treatment and could not submit to field sobriety tests at the scene.
Officer Chase Parmer prepared an affidavit seeking a warrant to draw Kruse’s blood, stating officers and rescue personnel smelled alcohol, Kruse was incoherent, and that blood alcohol dissipates over time.
A county judge issued the warrant; officers later obtained a preliminary breath test (> .15) at the hospital, executed the warrant, and two vials of blood tested at .168 BAC.
Kruse was charged, moved to suppress the blood-test evidence as obtained under an affidavit allegedly insufficient to establish probable cause, and lost in county court; he stipulated to a bench trial and was convicted.
On appeal to the district court and then to the Nebraska Supreme Court, Kruse argued the affidavit lacked sufficient detail; the State invoked the Leon good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, declining to resolve probable-cause sufficiency and holding that, even if the affidavit were deficient, officers reasonably relied on the warrant and the Leon good-faith exception applied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the affidavit supported probable cause for a blood draw	Kruse: affidavit was "thin" and failed to identify affiant, driver, time/location, that a vehicle was public, or that Kruse was the driver	State: affidavit plus scene observations supported probable cause; officers reasonably believed Kruse was the driver and intoxicated	Court: did not decide probable-cause sufficiency; assumed possible deficiency but resolved case on Leon good-faith grounds
Whether the Leon good-faith exception may be raised on appeal and applies here	Kruse: State waived Leon by not raising it in county court; warrant was so lacking in indicia of probable cause that reliance was unreasonable	State: may raise good faith on appeal; facts in record show objectively reasonable officer reliance on a judicially issued warrant	Court: State may raise Leon on appeal where record suffices; Leon applies—officers acted in objectively reasonable good faith, so evidence not excluded

United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (establishes good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
State v. Tompkins, 272 Neb. 547 (discusses appellate courts raising Leon sua sponte and waiver concerns)
State v. Hatfield, 300 Neb. 152 (applies good-faith analysis to blood-draw issues on appeal)
State v. Hoerle, 297 Neb. 840 (discusses exclusionary rule and related Fourth Amendment principles)