 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Troyer2/5/2003
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
This cause was heard upon the record in the trial court. Each error assigned has been reviewed and the following disposition is made:
Appellant, Steven A. Troyer, appeals from a judgment of conviction in the Wayne County Court of Common Pleas. We affirm.
I.
A two-car traffic accident occurred on Back Orrville Road in Wayne County in the late evening of May 25, 2001. As a result of that accident, Appellant was charged with three counts: (1) aggravated vehicular assault, (2) driving while under the influence of alcohol, and (3) driving with a prohibited blood-alcohol concentration. Appellant entered a plea of not guilty to all counts and filed a motion to suppress the results of a blood-alcohol test. As grounds, he asserted that the blood was withdrawn in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and also that it was not withdrawn within two hours of his alleged operation of the vehicle. Following a hearing, the trial judge overruled the Fourth Amendment argument and dismissed the third court, pursuant to the two-hour requirement of R.C. 4511.19(D)(1).
Appellant proceeded to trial on the remaining two counts and a jury returned a verdict of guilty on both. The trial judge sentenced Appellant to a term of five years on the charge of aggravated vehicular assault and six months on the charge of driving while under the influence of alcohol, to be served concurrently. Appellant has appealed to this court and has assigned two errors for review.
II.
Assignment of Error No.1
"The trial court erred by overruling appellant's motion to suppress the results of the blood alcohol test, which was obtained as the result of blood drawn at the instruction of the state patrol in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, when there was no probable cause for the blood draw, no probable cause for an arrest, no search warrant authorizing the blood draw, and no consent by appellant."
In his first assignment of error, Appellant contends the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress the results of a nonconsensual and warrantless blood-alcohol test, taken while he was unconscious. He contends that this procedure violated the Fourth Amendment.
The relevant facts, as presented at the hearing on the motion to suppress, came from the testimony of two state troopers. Shortly after 11:00 p.m., on May 25, 2001, state highway patrol officers were dispatched to the scene of a two-car accident. Each vehicle had one occupant. By the time the highway patrol arrived at the scene, Appellant had already been taken to Orrville Dunlap Hospital by members of the Orrville Fire Department and was subsequently life-flighted to Aultman Hospital. Emergency workers were still attempting to free the other driver from her severely damaged automobile.
Trooper Mark Haines conducted an inventory of Appellant's vehicle and testified that he detected the odor of alcohol in the vehicle. Trooper Haines determined that a blood sample had not been taken from Appellant at Orrville Dunlap Hospital. Thereupon, he contacted the highway patrol post closest to Aultman Hospital and requested that an officer go to the hospital to obtain a blood sample from Appellant for purposes of conducting a blood-alcohol test.
Shortly after 1:00 a.m., Trooper Steven Sherrod received a dispatch to proceed to Aultman Hospital and attempt to obtain a blood sample from Appellant. Trooper Sherrod testified that he located Appellant in the trauma room of the hospital, where several doctors and nurses were attending him. Trooper Sherrod stated that
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|