State v. Sauls
315 Ga. App. 98
Ga. Ct. App.2012Background
- State appeals trial court’s suppression of evidence of Sauls’s refusal to submit to state-administered chemical testing after DUI arrest.
- Trial court found the implied consent notice was incomplete because the officer omitted the line that his refusal could be used against him at trial.
- Facts are undisputed: Sauls stopped for erratic driving, arrested for DUI (as well as less-safe driving, open container, suspended license).
- After arrest, officer began reading the implied consent notice; Sauls interrupted; video shows omission of the line about evidence of refusal being admissible at trial.
- Trial court held the incomplete notice altered the substance of the warning; court suppressed the refusal evidence; Supreme Court of Georgia reverses, citing Neville and Dozier to reject automatic suppression.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effect of failure to warn that refusal may be used at trial | Sauls argues suppression required | State argues no suppression; Neville/Dozier control | Suppression not required; warning context allowed admission of refusal evidence |
| Relation of Neville/Dozier to Georgia implied consent warnings | Neville/Dozier support suppression due to incomplete notice | Neville/Dozier support that not all consequences must be warned | Georgia may rely on Neville/Dozier to permit admission of refusal evidence |
| Due process standards for implied consent notices | Due process demands complete notice | Due process not require informing all consequences | No due process violation; incomplete warning does not mandate suppression |
Key Cases Cited
- South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (U.S. Supreme Court 1983) (warning not necessary to warn of all consequences; refusal may be used consistent with due process)
- Chancellor v. Dozier, 283 Ga. 259 (Ga. 2008) (due process not require broader warnings; warning of license loss suffices)
- Chancellor v. State, 284 Ga. 66 (Ga. 2008) (recites Neville principle in Georgia context)
- Lockett v. State, 257 Ga. App. 412 (Ga. App. 2002) (appellate review of suppression under de novo standard for undisputed facts)
- State v. Nash, 279 Ga. 646 (Ga. 2005) (discusses standard of review for suppression rulings)