Background

• State appealed a suppression ruling in Paulding County Court after Wolfle was charged with OVI.
• Trooper Cook stopped Wolfle for window tint and detected alcohol odor and Wolfle’s bloodshot eyes.
• Wolfle admitted to consuming four beers; he was arrested and taken to the police department for a breath test showing BAC .096.
• Wolfle moved to suppress alleging lack of reasonable suspicion/probable cause, improper detainment, non-NHTSA testing, lack of probable cause for arrest, and improper breath-test administration.
• At the suppression hearing, the trial court excluded pre-test instrument check/calibration reports on Sixth Amendment confrontation grounds because there was no live witness to testify about them.
• The trial court partially overruled the suppression, but sustained on the ground that a Senior Operator’s instrument check had not been proven, leaving the breath-machine operation in question; the State appealed.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2004) (confrontation clause governs testimonial statements)
• Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 305 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2009) (recognizes certificates of analysis as testimonial; oral vs. non-testimonial context)
• State v. Collins, 2010-Ohio-5333 (5th Dist. Ohio) (breathalyzer calibration/instrument check reports deemed non-testimonial)
• State v. Shisler, 2006-Ohio-5265 (1st Dist. Ohio) (instrument maintenance documents can be non-testimonial)
• State v. Cook, 2006-Ohio-6062 (6th Dist. Ohio) (breathalyzer maintenance records not testimonial)
• State v. Crager, 164 Ohio App.3d 816 (Court of Appeals of Ohio, 2005) (DNA analysis and related testimony exception context)
• State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003-Ohio-5372) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings; mixed law/fact)
• State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (1997) (de novo standard for legal conclusions on suppression)