340 Ga. App. 232
Ga. Ct. App.2017Background
- Colleen Brogan was charged with DUI; the trial court suppressed results of a warrantless blood test, concluding the State failed to prove voluntary consent.
- Officer found Brogan asleep in a car in an intersection; ambulance had checked her and taken vitals before officer arrived.
- Officer observed lethargy, slurred speech, unsteady gait, confused and sometimes nonresponsive answers on video; officer did not detect alcohol odor and said he did not suspect alcohol impairment initially.
- Officer handcuffed and detained Brogan in a patrol car without telling her she was under arrest, read Georgia’s implied-consent notice there, and asked if she consented to a blood test; officer testified Brogan bobbed her head but could not recall an articulated “yes,” and no audible consent appears on the video.
- Officer transported Brogan to a hospital where blood was drawn; the trial court found Brogan’s alleged consent was not proven voluntary and suppressed the blood-test evidence.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Brogan's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brogan voluntarily consented to a warrantless blood draw, eliminating need for a warrant | The evidence (officer testimony and implied-consent notice) showed Brogan consented to the blood test | Brogan was extremely intoxicated/confused and did not give voluntary, knowing consent | Court affirmed suppression: evidence, construed for the trial court, did not demand a contrary finding; voluntariness not established |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 296 Ga. 817 (State must prove consent was voluntary for warrantless DUI blood draw)
- Underwood v. State, 283 Ga. 498 (appellate standard when facts on suppression are disputed)
- Allen v. State, 298 Ga. 1 (courts may rely on indisputably discernable facts from videotape)
- Hughes v. State, 296 Ga. 744 (trial judge resolves disputed material facts at suppression hearing)
- Code v. State, 234 Ga. 90 (voluntariness of consent is a fact question for court to decide)
- Bowman v. State, 337 Ga. App. 313 (when evidence doesn't demand contrary finding, appellate court will not reverse suppression)
- Durrence v. State, 295 Ga. App. 216 (same principle upholding suppression where record supports trial court)
- Kendrick v. State, 335 Ga. App. 766 (totality of circumstances governs implied-consent/actual-consent analysis)