State v. Webre
347 S.W.3d 381
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Webre was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) after refusing a blood sample.
- The police obtained a blood-draw warrant by presenting a magistrate with an affidavit detailing observed signs of intoxication.
- The affidavit described Webre's odor of alcohol, disheveled appearance, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, poor balance, and vomiting, plus refusal of sobriety tests.
- The magistrate issued the warrant finding probable cause based on the affidavit, authorizing a blood draw that would constitute evidence of the DWI offense.
- Webre moved to suppress the blood-test results, challenging the affidavit for not stating how the blood would be used; the trial court granted suppression, which the State appeals.
- The appellate court ultimately held that the affidavit provided a substantial basis for probable cause and reversed the suppression order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the blood-draw warrant affidavit established probable cause | Webre contends the affidavit lacks use-specific details. | Webre's position is that the affidavit should specify how the blood would prove DWI. | Probable cause existed; affidavit sufficient. |
| Whether the affidavit needed to specify the blood’s intended use | Webre argues the affidavit must state how blood would evidence DWI. | State contends such specificity is not required; magistrate can infer purpose. | No explicit use-specification required; warrant valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLain v. State, 337 S.W.3d 268 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (highly deferential review of magistrate’s probable-cause determination)
- Flores v. State, 319 S.W.3d 697 (Tex.Crim.App.2010) (affidavit interpreted in a common-sense, non-technical manner)
- Hankins v. State, 132 S.W.3d 380 (Tex.Crim.App.2004) (great deference to magistrate’s determination of probable cause)
- Jordan v. State, 342 S.W.3d 565 (Tex.Crim.App.2011) (probable cause under totality-of-the-circumstances standard)
- Rodriguez v. State, 232 S.W.3d 55 (Tex.Crim.App.2007) (magistrate’s probable-cause finding given substantial deference)
- Dugas v. State, 296 S.W.3d 112 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2009) (probable cause review not de novo; substantial basis standard)
- Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause under totality of circumstances; high deference to magistrate)