State v. Orr
2016 Ohio 1148
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Orr was convicted of operating a vehicle while under the influence (OVI) in Brown County Municipal Court.
- Trooper Klontz observed Orr weave left of center and detected strong odor of alcohol.
- Orr had BAC .131 on the BAC DataMaster breath test.
- Orr moved to suppress the breath test results, challenging compliance with health regulations.
- Trial court denied suppression; Orr was later acquitted of one OVI count and convicted of the other on non-suppress evidence.
- Appellate court affirms suppression ruling, holding the state showed only a slight burden met by uncontradicted operator testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress the breath test. | Orr contends the state failed to prove substantial compliance with health regulations. | Orr asserts testing regulations or operator qualification were not demonstrated. | No error; state met the slight burden through uncontradicted operator testimony. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dugan, 2013-Ohio-447 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2013) (limits challenges to BAC test to regulatory compliance and operator qualification)
- State v. Plunkett, 2008-Ohio-1014 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2008) (state must show substantial compliance with applicable health regulations)
- State v. Jimenez, 2007-Ohio-1658 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2007) (general claims permit only slight burden to show regulatory compliance)
- City of Xenia v. Wallace, 37 Ohio St.3d 216 (Ohio 1988) (procedure for suppression challenges and evidentiary standards)
- State v. Nicholson, 2004-Ohio-6666 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2004) (extent of state's burden tied to defendant's specific factual bases)
- State v. Embry, 2004-Ohio-6324 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2004) (plaintiff's discovery and cross-examination may shape burden to show compliance)
- State v. Vaughn, 2015-Ohio-828 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2015) (reaffirms review standards for suppression rulings)
- State v. Cochran, 2007-Ohio-3353 (Ohio Ct. App. 12th Dist. 2007) (legal standard for reviewing suppression decisions)