State v. Ruppert, 5 N.E.3d 1016

Charles D. Ruppert was arrested after a single-vehicle crash on Oct. 25, 2012; a neighbor, Theresa Everson, awakened by barking dogs, called dispatch at 5:56 a.m. after seeing Ruppert near her house.
Deputy McConnell arrived shortly after 6:00 a.m., found Ruppert disoriented walking on Everson’s property and later located Ruppert’s car down a hill in a wooded area; McConnell observed the car hood was warm on a frosty morning.
Ruppert was transported to the county jail where Deputy Carr administered a Datamaster breath test at 8:15 a.m., producing a .174 BAC result.
Ruppert moved to suppress the breath test on the ground the test was not performed within three hours of operation as required by R.C. 4511.19(D)(1)(b); the trial court denied the motion and Ruppert pled no contest to OVI (R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(h)).
The municipal court sentenced Ruppert; he appealed asserting (1) the court erred in finding operation occurred within three hours of testing, and (2) the conviction was based on insufficient evidence/against manifest weight.
The appellate majority affirmed, finding competent circumstantial evidence supported the trial court’s inference that operation occurred within three hours; one judge dissented, finding the State failed its burden to affirmatively establish the three-hour window.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether breath test was taken within statutory three-hour window	State: Circumstantial evidence (Everson’s 5:56 a.m. call, Everson’s estimate she was awakened ~5:30 a.m., warm hood, deputy arrival ~6:00 a.m., test at 8:15 a.m.) permits inference operation was within three hours	Ruppert: No affirmative evidence of when the crash/last operation occurred; witness times were guesses; no proof how long hood stays warm; thus suppression required	Majority: Denied suppression — competent credible circumstantial evidence supported inference operation was within three hours; Dissent: would reverse for failure to meet State’s burden
Sufficiency / manifest weight of evidence for OVI conviction	State: .174 BAC and officers’ observations (staggering, odor, field sobriety failure) prove elements when test admissible	Ruppert: If three-hour rule not met, test should be excluded and evidence insufficient; even if admitted, facts do not support conviction beyond reasonable doubt	Majority: Overruled challenge — evidence (including admissible breath result) was sufficient and conviction not against manifest weight; Dissent: did not reach because would suppress test

State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (1997) (standard for mixed questions of fact and law on suppression review)
State v. Dunlap, 73 Ohio St.3d 308 (1995) (trial court as factfinder and credibility determinations on suppression)
United States v. Martinez, 949 F.2d 1117 (11th Cir. 1992) (mixed question standard cited for suppression review)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (Jackson sufficiency standard adopted in Ohio)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (evidence sufficiency standard: any rational trier of fact)
DeHass v. State, 10 Ohio St.2d 230 (1967) (appellate deference to trier of fact on credibility and reasonable inferences)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (manifest-weight-of-the-evidence standard)