477 P.3d 501
Utah Ct. App.2020Background
- Police responded to complaints of a loud house party that spilled into the street and escalated to a fight; 15–20 people were in the street and some were fleeing.
- Officer positioned his marked patrol car to block the road, activated lights, and signaled drivers to stop; Sanchez drove around the patrol car and toward an intersection where other officers blocked him.
- Sanchez ignored commands, refused to exit at first, was agitated and profane; the officer smelled alcohol, observed glossy/red eyes, and performed an HGN test (Sanchez showed 6/6 clues).
- Sanchez was handcuffed, transported to the station, refused breath testing and further sobriety tests; officer obtained a warrant for a blood draw based on an affidavit listing facts including slurred speech, open containers, failed sobriety tests, and refusal to submit to breath test.
- Warrant-authorized blood test showed BAC .13%; Sanchez moved to suppress the HGN and blood evidence and sought a Franks evidentiary hearing alleging materially false or misleading statements in the warrant affidavit.
- The district court denied both motions; Sanchez entered conditional guilty pleas preserving suppression issues and appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause for arrest (DUI) | Sanchez: Officer lacked probable cause to arrest him for DUI, so evidence from arrest should be suppressed. | State: Even if DUI probable cause was lacking, officer objectively had probable cause to arrest Sanchez for failing to stop and fleeing, which legitimized the arrest and resulting evidence. | Held: The arrest was lawful because objectively there was probable cause to arrest for failure to stop; denial of suppression affirmed. |
| Franks hearing / warrant affidavit accuracy | Sanchez: Affidavit contained false/omitted facts (e.g., slurred speech, "open containers," multiple failed tests) requiring a Franks hearing and suppression if material. | State: Even removing the challenged statements, the affidavit contained sufficient accurate facts (odor of alcohol, admission to drinking, refusal of breath test, belligerence, HGN failure) to establish probable cause for the blood warrant. | Held: No Franks hearing required; alleged inaccuracies were not necessary to the magistrate's probable-cause finding, so the warrant and blood evidence stand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (officer's subjective intent irrelevant to the existence of probable cause)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (objective reasonableness, not officer's subjective intent, governs Fourth Amendment seizure analysis)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (establishes requirements for a hearing where affidavit contains knowingly false or recklessly made false statements that are necessary to probable cause)
- State v. Applegate, 194 P.3d 925 (Utah) (officer's subjective intent is irrelevant to reasonable-suspicion/probable-cause inquiries)
- State v. Krukowski, 100 P.3d 1222 (Utah) (warrant must be voided and fruits excluded if probable cause is lacking once false statements are excised)