State v. Simmons
409 P.3d 129
Utah Ct. App.2017Background
- Late-night stop at Salt Lake City airport after erratic driving; officer observed signs of intoxication (odor, bloodshot eyes, open container) and arrested Simmons for suspected DUI.
- Simmons refused field sobriety and other voluntary tests; remained handcuffed at station due to noncompliance and agitation.
- Sergeant Albrecht prepared and swore an affidavit for a warrant to draw blood, relying on Officer Brown’s firsthand observations; warrant issued and Detective Payne (phlebotomist) drew blood after Simmons resisted and was physically restrained.
- Officers did not hand Simmons a copy of the warrant before the blood draw; a copy was later placed with his personal effects. Blood test showed .21 BAC.
- Simmons moved to suppress the blood-test results arguing (1) the warrant was invalid because the affiant lacked personal knowledge and (2) the warrant was not properly served as required by rule 40(d). District court denied suppression; convictions followed.
Issues
| Issue | Simmons' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of warrant where affiant lacked personal knowledge | Affiant (Albrecht) had no personal knowledge and relied on another officer; warrant invalid | Officers may rely on fellow officers' observations; affidavit disclosed Brown as the firsthand source | Warrant valid: affidavit permitted reliance on fellow officer and disclosed source; probable cause satisfied |
| Service of warrant under Utah R. Crim. P. 40(d) | Officers failed to serve a readable copy on Simmons before the blood draw; evidence should be suppressed | Either failure to hand a copy is not a Fourth Amendment violation warranting suppression, or placement of the copy with Simmons’s belongings was adequate given his disruptive behavior | Court affirmed on alternative ground: Simmons did not challenge district court’s finding that service was adequate, so suppression not required |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 (1965) (fellow-officer observations are a reliable basis for a warrant)
- State v. Nielsen, 727 P.2d 188 (Utah 1986) (misleading affidavit by affiant who misrepresented sources can affect probable cause analysis)
- State v. Fuller, 332 P.3d 937 (Utah 2014) (standard of review for suppression decisions: mixed question of law and fact)
- State v. Worwood, 164 P.3d 397 (Utah 2007) (issue preservation required for appellate review of constitutional claims)