2017 Ohio 7666
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- On Sept. 25, 2016, Alan Mattes was stopped and arrested for OVI in Fairfield County; he consented to chemical testing.
- At the patrol post, his single breath test on a BAC Datamaster registered as an "invalid sample" at 2:13 a.m.; trooper declined a second breath attempt based on training and offered urine instead.
- Mattes failed to produce a sufficient urine sample within about two minutes; trooper marked him as having "refused" chemical testing on the BMV-2255 form at 2:15 a.m.
- Mattes appealed the Administrative License Suspension (ALS); the municipal court denied the appeal, finding his conduct manifested unwillingness to test.
- The appellate majority affirmed, finding competent, credible evidence of a constructive refusal; a dissent argued trooper curtailed testing unfairly and Mattes had attempted to comply.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mattes) | Defendant's Argument (State/Trooper) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether inability to provide a valid breath or urine sample after good-faith efforts constitutes a "refusal" under R.C. 4511.197 | Mattes: He attempted to comply; an invalid breath sample and limited time to produce urine show inability, not refusal | State: Trooper reasonably concluded Mattes could refuse; invalid breath could be caused by appellant, trooper lawfully offered urine and marked refusal after no sample | Court: Affirmed—circumstances permitted finding of constructive refusal; evidence supported ALS denial |
| Whether officer was required to offer a second breath test after an invalid sample | Mattes: Officer should have offered another breath attempt | State: No statutory duty to administer a second breath test; officer may direct tests and choose method | Court: No statutory requirement to provide a second breath test; officer's choice to seek urine was permissible |
| Whether marking "refused" after short urine attempt was reasonable | Mattes: Trooper allowed only ~2 minutes and denied requests for water/waiting time | State: Trooper testified appellant did not provide sample; reasonable to conclude refusal | Court: Viewing totality, trial court could credit trooper and find unwillingness; marked refusal supported |
| Standard of review for ALS appeal evidence | Mattes: (implied) trial court misweighed evidence and credibility | State: ALS appeals are civil; review asks whether judgment supported by competent, credible evidence | Court: Applied civil sufficiency and manifest-weight principles; deferred to trial court credibility findings and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 76 Ohio St.3d 290 (Ohio 1996) (ALS appeal is a civil matter)
- Hoban v. Rice, 25 Ohio St.2d 111 (Ohio 1971) (refusal can be manifested by acts, words, or conduct; not a refusal if person is unable to perform requested act)
- City of Kettering v. Baker, 42 Ohio St.2d 351 (Ohio 1975) (R.C. 4511.191 does not create an obligation that tests must be administered)
- State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (Ohio Ct. App. 1983) (standard for weighing evidence and manifest-weight review)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (framework for manifest-weight review and deference to trial court factfinding)