State v. Ostdiek
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1118
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- Deputy stopped Ostdiek for speeding on North Brighton, a city street within Kansas City and Clay County, where the posted limit was 40 mph and radar showed 16 mph over.
- Deputy detected alcohol odor and bloodshot eyes, placing Ostdiek under suspicion of DUI after the stop.
- Pills and a marijuana-appearing pipe were found in Ostdiek's vehicle; Deputy performed a HGN test rather than a full field sobriety test.
- Ostdiek confessed to consuming whiskey and marijuana earlier; breath test showed a .114% BAC after implied-consent administration.
- Motion to suppress challenged Deputy’s authority to stop for speeding and the radar foundation; the court denied suppression.
- Trial proceeded to bench trial with contested admissibility of radar, HGN, and breath-test results; Ostdiek was convicted of DWI, speeding, and possession of drug paraphernalia.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to stop for speeding on municipal street | Ostdiek argues section 304.010 lacks reach on municipal streets; deputy lacked authority. | State contends 304.010 applies to state roads/highways including municipal streets; sheriff may enforce. | Stop valid; 304.010 applies to all public thoroughfares, sheriff authority preserved. |
| Sufficiency of speeding evidence | Evidence relied solely on officer’s uncorroborated opinion of speed. | Officer’s visual estimate, coupled with pursuit context, suffices under case law. | Guilty verdict for speeding reversed; insufficient substantial evidence without corroboration. |
| Admissibility of HGN results—foundation | Officer’s training and ability to administer HGN not adequately shown. | Officer testified to minimum requirements and training; foundation adequate. | Foundation for HGN admissible; testimony properly grounded. |
| Breathalyzer evidence under executive orders | Executive Order 07-05 transferred BAP to MoDOT; permits from DHSS invalid. | Order contemplated a transfer process; continuity and regulatory framework allowed admission. | Breathalyzer results properly admitted; EO07-05 did not invalidate permits retroactively. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Kansas City v. Oxley, 579 S.W.2d 113 (Mo. banc 1979) (un corroborated speed opinion evidence insufficient for speeding guilt)
- State v. Dunn, 147 S.W.3d 75 (Mo. banc 2004) (highways include public streets; 'highway' construed broadly)
- Covert v. Fisher, 151 S.W.3d 70 (Mo. App. 2004) (history of 'highway' definition and legislative adoption)
- Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702 (Mo. App. 1993) (minimum HGN training referenced for admissibility)
- Rose, 86 S.W.3d 90 (Mo. App. 2002) (adequate HGN foundation requires training and proper administration)
- Ross, 344 S.W.3d 790 (Mo. App. W.D. 2011) (executive orders transferring BAP authority analyzed; continuity maintained)
- Schneider, 339 S.W.3d 533 (Mo. App. 2011) (EO07-05 transfer process did not terminate DHSS permits immediately)