State v. Sullivan, 80 A.3d 67

DOC officer encounters Sullivan walking near a snowed-in car and offers a ride home; he reports the car to police.
Officer Muldoon goes to Sullivan’s apartment; Sullivan’s grandmother lets him in and calls Sullivan to come out.
Sullivan provides evasive answers, a slight odor of alcohol is detected, and she is asked about drinking; she agrees to step outside for tests.
Grandmother and friend present; Sullivan discusses DUI processing with them; Sullivan refuses field sobriety and breath tests.
Sergeant Vail arrives; Sullivan admits drinking; she is arrested and transported to the station for the evidentiary test which yields a BAC of 0.246.
Sullivan moves to suppress evidence and statements; trial court denies; Sullivan pleads guilty conditioned on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Reasonable suspicion for initial seizure	Sullivan argues Muldoon lacked reasonable suspicion to detain her.	Sullivan contends the facts were insufficient to justify detention.	Detention supported by reasonable suspicion; totality of circumstances adequate.
Pre-arrest custodial status before formal arrest	Sullivan argues she was effectively in custody before arrest due to coercive statements.	Sullivan argues officers’ actions created a de facto arrest before formal arrest.	No de facto arrest prior to formal arrest; intrusion did not exceed investigative detention.
Miranda warnings during pre-arrest interrogation	Because Sullivan was effectively interrogated in her home, Miranda warnings were required.	Interrogation occurred in a non-custodial setting; warnings were not required.	Not in custody; no Miranda warnings required; statements admissible.
Voluntariness of statements under Vermont Constitution (Article 10)	Coercive tactics and the ‘one-of-two-ways’ remark rendered statements involuntary.	Police conduct did not overbear Sullivan’s will; statements voluntary.	Statements voluntarily made; no coercion significant enough to render them involuntary.

State v. Simoneau, 176 Vt. 15 (2003 VT 83) (standards for suppression of mixed question of law and fact)
State v. Chapman, 800 A.2d 446 (2002 VT 111) (investigatory detention permitted under totality of circumstances)
State v. Bruno, 595 A.2d 272 (1991 VT) (reasonable suspicion factors in DUI context)
State v. Willis, 494 A.2d 108 (1985 VT) (custody determination factors for Miranda applicability)
State v. Muntean, 12 A.3d 518 (2010 VT 88) (free to leave; custody factors in totality framework)
State v. Pontbriand, 178 Vt. 120 (2005 VT 20) (police-dominated atmosphere as custody indicator)
State v. Fleurie, 185 Vt. 29 (2008 VT 118) (interrogation in home and movement restrictions as custody indicators)
State v. Caron, 155 Vt. 492 (1990 VT) (Article 10 voluntariness standard and totality of circumstances)
State v. Weisler, 35 A.3d 970 (2011 VT 96) (deference vs. de novo review on voluntariness determinations)