2015 Ohio 146
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- Schmidt was arrested for OVI after a breath test (.097) using an Intoxilyzer 8000.
- Schmidt was indicted on four counts including two felonies for OVI and a misdemeanor for license restoration.
- Schmidt moved in limine to preclude introducing breath test results and separately moved to suppress the test.
- The court conducted a Daubert-like hearing focusing on the Intoxilyzer 8000’s reliability and granted both motions.
- The State appeals, arguing Vega and Daubert preclude a challenge to the general reliability of the instrument; the court’s decision is reversed on appeal.
- The appellate court remands for further proceedings and notes the suppression ruling was not ripe for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Vega/Daubert framework applies to the Intoxilyzer 8000 reliability | State argues Vega prohibits attacking general reliability; Daubert analysis not required | Schmidt argues Daubert/Rule 702 scrutiny applies to specific machine reliability | Trial court erred; Vega/Ilg permit attack on the specific test, not general reliability |
| Whether the in limine ruling to exclude test results was proper | State contends admissibility should be evaluated under Vega and statutory framework | Schmidt contends the court must preclude unreliable results | Court erred in granting in limine by applying Daubert/702 to general reliability |
| Whether the suppression ruling is ripe for appellate review | State argues suppression ruling on multiple issues should stand | Schmidt contends suppression issues require a proper hearing and record | Suppression ruling not ripe; remand to conduct a proper suppression hearing and specify evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185 (1984) (allows attack on specific testing procedure, not general device reliability)
- State v. Ilg, 141 Ohio St.3d 22 (2014) (approval of device does not preclude challenges to individual test results)
- Miller v. Bike Athletic Co., 80 Ohio St.3d 607 (1998) (Daubert factors guide reliability of scientific evidence under Evid.R. 702)
- Valentine v. Conrad, 110 Ohio St.3d 42 (2006) (gatekeeper analysis for expert testimony under Evid.R. 702)
- State v. Schwarz, 2003-Ohio-1294 (2nd Dist. 2003) (recognizes Vega and limitations on challenging general reliability)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (finality of suppression rulings and standards on review)