795 N.W.2d 351
N.D.2011Background
- Tompkins was arrested for driving under the influence and pled guilty conditionally, preserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling.
- The district court suppressed Tompkins’ independent blood test results but not the breath test results.
- Tompkins requested an independent blood test; the officer drove him to Jamestown Hospital and arranged the draw.
- The nurse used the State Crime Lab kit; the blood was sent to the State Crime Lab for analysis and results were disclosed to the State’s Attorney.
- Tompkins claimed excessive government involvement denied him the independent test, affecting the trial record.
- The Court held the State did not impermissibly interfere with the independent blood test, and affirmed the criminal judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did officer interference deny a reasonable opportunity for an independent test? | Tompkins argues the officer limited choice and remained present during the draw. | Tompkins asserts the officer’s conduct aided him but did not interfere; the officer had no duty to assist. | No impermissible interference; no duty to actively assist. |
| Did State Crime Lab involvement violate § 39-20-02? | State involvement through lab testing and mailing the results violated Tompkins’ rights. | Statute is unambiguous and allows the test and cost responsibility to the accused with no broader rights. | No violation; rights under § 39-20-02 were satisfied. |
| Did mailing of the sample to the State Crime Lab and state-actor involvement amount to impermissible interference? | Mailing and state involvement could manipulate results. | No evidence of manipulation; routine testing is non-actionable government involvement. | Not impermissible interference; test admissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Fargo v. Stutlien, 505 N.W.2d 738 (N.D.1993) (remedies for denial of independent test)
- City of Fargo v. Bakkerud, 576 N.W.2d 858 (N.D.1998) (officer not to hinder reasonable opportunity)
- City of Grand Forks v. Zejdlik, 551 N.W.2d 772 (N.D.1996) (standard deferential to district court on findings of fact)
- Moore v. State, 541 N.W.2d 84 (N.D.1995) (access to telephone as reasonable accommodation)
- Bakkerud, 1998 ND 77, 576 N.W.2d 858 (N.D.1998) (non-interference standard for independent test)
- State v. Gregg, 2000 ND 154, 615 N.W.2d 515 (N.D.2000) (review of suppression rulings and statutory rights)